It’s Saturday, so we’re going to throw off precision and accuracy and just wildly speculate and completely make stuff up. You’ve been warned.
After the Professor posted serious research indicating that opposites do not attract, I asked ChatGPT to summarize the research on marital relationships and introversion and extroversion. Here are the results:
As might be expected with multiple variables (including extroversion vs introversion and male vs female), the answer is complex. But, I’ve long observed that most men in the Manosphere are introverts, so I asked for their data only:
Introverted males have wildly disparate, even contradictory, outcomes. It seems to me that sometimes introverted males like to live life on the edge with wild extroverted women: trying for the very best, but just as likely to get the very worst. Or instead they choose to marry another introvert and get stuck with mediocrity.
I suspect there is a factor behind this, like how high neuroticism leads to the worst outcomes and how extroversion in one partner leads to a higher chance of infidelity in either partner, while high conscientiousness and high agreeableness leading to better outcomes.
But who knows. I have not found adequate research on the subject.
I’ve thought the three dominate memes of the Manosphere were contradictory. Maybe there is an explanation:
Does the meh-tier introverted female + introverted male correspond to the oft-frigid “beta marriage” meme? (Is the Pseudonymous Commenter—an INTJ—an example?)
Does the garbage-tier extroverted female + introverted male correspond to the “constantly wants to usurp my authority, this marriage sucks” meme? (are Jack and Red Pill Apostle, like here and here, examples?)
Does the extroverted female + extroverted male correspond to the “really desires her husband and for him to dominate her, but will constantly fitness test him, so game, game game!” meme? (are Roissy and Dalrock examples?)
I have no idea, but these sound interesting. And I’m not sure about this one:
Does the introverted female + extroverted male correspond to bog-standard “opposites attract” marriages? (are Liz, Elspeth, Ame, and myself examples?)
I wonder how many, if any, Manosphere men fit into this category. Is there a pattern? I wish I had an audience big enough to take a poll.
For what it’s worth, Roissy at Chateau Heartiste mostly agrees with me, but he sees some expected similarity between introverted female + introverted male and extroverted female + introverted male in terms of frigidity. He also sees game as a natural extroverted skill that is difficult for introverts.
The Manosphere has become—or always has been—INTJ, bringing with it their common “pathologies.” This includes known figures like Gunner Q, Deep Strength, Free Northerner, Boxer, apparently Rollo Tomassi, and most of the crew at Spawny’s Space (Farm Boy, Cill, Cheque d’Out, a pseudonymous commenter, Kentucky Headhunter, Cautiously Pessimistic, Liz, and others). The growing influence of the INTJ may account for the Manosphere’s shift away from…
Game and Genesis 3:16 desire to be dominated
…and towards…
a focus on authority and Genesis 3:16 desire to control.
Here are all the references to the personality types discussed at Dalrock’s blog (including the comment section):
INTJ dominates, followed by its closest match INTP, both “Analysts:”
In third place is the next closest match, INFJ (a Diplomat):
Together these three types only account for 7% of the population, but seem to dominate the Manosphere.
Lastly, in fourth place we have the only remaining closest match, ISTJ (a Sentinel):
All are introverts. All are INTJ or directly adjacent to it. After these four, almost no other personality types were discussed.
It’s actually quite astounding that almost the entire crew of regular commenters at Spawny’s Space is INTJ. It is like the MGTOW group that Tarnished mentions, which is 85% INTJ with the rest being INTJ-adjacent. It’s such a massive echo chamber and yet, they’ll deny to their dying breath that their ideas are extremely biased and not globally applicable. The idea that virtually every single commenter being an INTJ is attributable to random chance is nonsensical. It’s heavily selected and people who are not INTJ or INTJ-adjacent are quickly filtered out.
Introverted males have wildly disparate, even contradictory, outcomes. It seems to me that sometimes introverted males like to live life on the edge with wild extroverted women: trying for the very best, but just as likely to get the very worst. Or instead they choose to marry another introvert and get stuck with mediocrity.
I suspect there is a factor behind this, like how high neuroticism leads to the worst outcomes and how extroversion in one partner leads to a higher chance of infidelity in either partner, while high conscientiousness and high agreeableness leading to better outcomes.
i mainly too many of the MEN that come to the sphere actually believed their ”Conservative” churches when they said ”women naturally want to obey and be led by a (GENTLE)-{you were supposed to be an MR.Rogers(public image of him-NOT the reality version of him, which is always more nuanced)like MAN before Trump’s Vincent Kennedy Mcmahon ran for president in 2015/’16 -then it became-} (STRONG)MAN.
They will even tell you they were told to be a( public image) version of MR. Rogers and women will love you-BUT i like Roissy NEVER really believed that from what WE had seen, even as a kid i thought MR. Rogers (public image) was just for kids to believe in(to feel safe by)like Santa Claus and NOT reality(most adults were superficial about liking and wanting to help children and i knew it)-just like most women were about playing being perfect and wanting to obey an ”IN-CHARGE MAN” later i couldn’t believe anybody actually bought and believed these public images of anyone.
i actually believed everyone could see what i could which was stuff like the following which is near the extreme opposite of the MR. Rogers (public image)
https://heartiste.org/2013/11/22/the-female-preference-for-badboys-quantified/
The Female Preference For Badboys, Quantified
Nov 22nd, 2013 by CH
The Female Preference For Badboys, Quantified
Nov 22nd, 2013 by CH
Reader Never Mind the Balzac writes,
It’s estimated that around 100 British women are engaged or married to men on death row in the US at any one time.
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2003/jan/13/gender.uk
Given the logistical/administrative difficulties of starting/maintaining one of these relationships, I suspect the women that are inclined to this behaviour vastly out-number the ones that actually go through with it.
A chorus of platitude pushing women and their thimblepeen allies that is growing more silent and enfeebled by the day thanks to the yeoman efforts of your humble proprietors, insists only a few crazy women way out at the extremes of female behavior have relationships with death row lotharios. But, as Balzac astutely notes above, what you are seeing in those newsworthy stories of women with their inmate lovers is only the tip of the viceberg. For every one woman who hurdles all the obstacles put in her way to feel the reptilian embrace of a man who once spilled blood for fun, there are a thousand more women who experience a similar simmering desire for the thug but who don’t have the vajflaps or the taste for high adventure to consummate their lust.
This doesn’t mean those lazy or astonishingly prudent women don’t krave killer kock. Inertia is not the opposite of desire. Neither, for that matter, is fear.
I like to softly twist the shiv in the hides of beta males (wake-up call? or sadistic hobby? you be the judge), so now’s a good time to ask them when the last time was a woman jumped through a million logistical, legal and administrative hoops to hungrily soak in their special brand of beta male love? What’s that? Never, you say? Well, then, you know what to do. Hie thee to thy masturbatorium!
Read the link provided. The melancholia-tinged laughs are inexhaustible.
Three years ago a German waitress called Dagmar Polzin fell in love with a murderer while waiting at a Hamburg bus stop. She saw his photo on a Benetton anti-death-penalty poster. Bobby Lee Harris, a North Carolina man with an IQ of 75, was on death row for stabbing his boss to death during a robbery on a shrimp boat. Polzin was overwhelmed by the picture,
“It was something in his eyes,” she later said. “There was this remorse, sadness. I was attracted. I knew he was the one.”
Within the year Polzin and Harris were engaged and she had moved to America to live with his family. This story seems a little surprising, but if you see the picture that Dagmar fell in love with it is, frankly, astonishing. He may have many charming accomplishments to recommend him as a husband, but Harris is not a bonny boy.
Low IQ, badboy killer charm >>>>>> male looks.
It was recently reported that Ian Huntley, the Soham man charged with the murders of schoolgirls Jessica Chapman and Holly Wells, receives bundles of fan mail from women every week – many containing photographs of themselves.
Child murderers are reportedly the most hated of all criminal elements. And yet, even they have no trouble inspiring women to swooning declarations of everlasting love.
Prison romances seem in no danger of dying out. But the cliche of the prison bride as wig-wearing trailer-trash is misguided: the women come from all sectors of society. Carlos the Jackal become engaged to his lawyer last year. The famous Glasgow hard man Jimmy Boyle married a psychiatrist he met in prison. The most common form of contact, certainly for many of the 100 or so British women currently engaged or married to American men on death row, is through anti-death-penalty campaign internet sites.
REVOKE THE VOTE, 2013.
The most melancholy story concerns two middle-aged Christian sisters, Avril and Rose, who left long-term “boring” marriages for men in prison.
Sometimes women despise beta males so much they don’t even want their bux.
One man had been convicted of a string of minor property offences, the other man had killed his previous wife.
Once a woman’s love algorithm is executed (heh), not even knowing a man’s history of killing his previous wife will stop her from delivering the male to her box. Throw caution to the wind, will a girl with tingling quim!
His new wife, Rose, said: “I have faith that if you’re genuine with the Lord you’re a new person. A lot of people have said I should be worried about him because of what he did and his background – which is pretty awful and violent – but I have no fear.”
This is the deformed, quasimodo version of Christianity.
Despite the women’s faith, both relationships ended tragically: a week after his release the thief bludgeoned Avril to death with a hammer. The other husband ended up back in prison after trying to cut Rose’s ear off and pull out her teeth with pliers.
However, it is rare that the most disturbing type of relationship is formed. Hybristophiliacs are sexually excited by violent outrages performed on others. These women often send pornographic pictures of themselves to prisoners. The self-styled “most violent prisoner in Britain”, Charles Bronson, publishes photos he receives on his website.
Beta male: Will u text me pic of your boobs?
Girl: Creep! Don’t ever call me again.
Charles Bronson: *rolls out rap sheet a mile long*
Girls: MY TATAS. MY P@SSY. ALL YOURS. MARRY US!!!
Funny things is, I’m not even exaggerating.
But, as clinical psychologist Dr Stuart Fischoff says, the love object is “almost irrelevant at this point. He’s a dream lover, a phantom limb”. Such fantasy projection can be used to wish away any aspect of reality. The excuses the women give for their partner’s alleged crimes operate as in all other relationships. They do what we all sometimes do when faced with negative information about loved ones: they refuse to believe it.
It’s informative to compare and contrast the rationalizing behavior of women with law-abiding betas and alpha killers. Women have no trouble, no trouble at all, believing negative things about their beta hubbies, and will often go to great lengths to exaggerate those negative impressions so that their transition away from the beta to a world of freedom to pursue anti-betas is as painless as possible. This behavior is quite unlike what we see women doing with alpha assholes, for whom every readily apparent flaw is instantly and vigorously denied or waved away by their women with the acumen of a star lawyer on a cocaine-fueled semantics bender.
On one website devoted to Richard Ramirez his wife says, “I appeal to all intelligent persons not to believe everything that is being presented about Richard in the media. The facts of his case ultimately will confirm that Richard is a wrongly-convicted man, and I believe fervently that his innocence will be proven to the world.”
Beta housepet: I forgot your mom’s birthday.
Wife: Is there anything you can do right? Remember when you forgot our 13th anniversary? Do you even care at all? Maybe if you got your head out of those video games you play all the time you’d stop being so g-damned selfish. I want a divorce.
Serial killer: I killed 20 people. Eh, it might’ve been 45.
Female admirer: Oh, I’m sure you had your reasons. Please love me like only you can.
Anyone who comes to this blog to insist, against the mountain of evidence proving otherwise, that only skanks or fugs or very rare specimens of womanhood with mental illness fall for the alluring charms of alpha male killers and crooks will be summarily banned for possessing the lethal combination of trollery and studied ignorance.
REVOKE THE VOTE, 2013.
And guys in the latter-day manosphere & the ”Conservativ”osphere think they are the ones who started the repeal of the 19th talk? There it is in November 2013.
A year right after the latest Republican® ”MR. Rogers (public image)” ”clean-shaven”Mitt Romney lost the 2012 presidential race.
Also, this is relevant to ALL of the abovehttps://www.quora.com/Why-do-some-men-try-to-tame-a-high-spirited-female
Captain Feelgood
Lived in Stockholm, Sweden4y
Related
Why are males so obsessed with taming ‘wild’ girls?
Because its the thrill, it’s like fishing / hunting it’d be no fun if the animal just laid down and died without some work put in.
Not saying women are like hunting game tho lmao, it’s just the way the male brain is wired.
It wasn’t that long ago in the big picture of the human race that we only hunted for food. Agriculture is relatively recent. It’s why sports, are so thrilling, its simulating a hunt, or aspects of it, which our brains are still hardwired to reward with dopamine.
Same reason girls lose interest if a guy seems too into her, there needs to be some challenge otherwise it seems like something is wrong, it’s part of the flirting game.
Bottom line?
Too many MEN actually wanted to believe the B.S. that their ”Conservative” churches, parents & culture{which was really just to make themselves look ”good”(which i had had the RP glasses to see through{like former & now dead, since 2015, wrestler Rowdy Roddy Piper(almost as ”GREAT” on the mic in promos=interviews as Ric Flair ever was in the 1980s} in the 1988 film ”THEY LIVE”, years before Roissy, Dalrock & the GBFMS everyone knows of ever existed} told them about women naturally desire to obey & serve men-when it was obviously NOT TRUE-
If it was, why did women have to be taught=instructed(even in the NT to Timothy & Titus with St.Paul like he gave for MEN too) how to behave (i.e. control themselves around MEN,other women & in society) by the ”Patriarchy” in the distant past or have ”finishing schools” in recent times?
See how i can ”analyze” things & NOT get so caught up in them at the same time?
Mainly because i more heavily prefer to just relax ”and let God take the wheel” as some have said over the past couple of decades.
It’s such a massive echo chamber and yet, they’ll deny to their dying breath that their ideas are extremely biased and not globally applicable. The idea that virtually every single commenter being an INTJ is attributable to random chance is nonsensical. It’s heavily selected and people who are not INTJ or INTJ-adjacent are quickly filtered out.
YEAH, it is like studies like the following…
https://www.apa.org/news/press/releases/2009/07/like-minded
Home News & advocacy Press room Press releases 2009
Date created: 2009
People Sometimes Seek the Truth, but Most Prefer Like-Minded Views
Read the journal article
Feeling Validated Versus Being Correct (PDF, 209KB)
CHAMPAIGN, III.—We swim in a sea of information, but filter out most of what we see or hear. New analysis of data from dozens of studies sheds new light on how we choose what we do and do not hear. The study found that while people tend to avoid information that contradicts what they already think or believe, certain factors can cause them to seek out, or at least consider, other points of view.
The analysis, reported this month in Psychological Bulletin published by the American Psychological Association and led by researchers at the University of Illinois and the University of Florida, included data from 91 studies involving nearly 8,000 participants. It puts to rest a longstanding debate over whether people actively avoid information that contradicts what they believe, or whether they are simply exposed more often to ideas that conform to their own because they tend to be surrounded by like-minded people.
“We wanted to see exactly across the board to what extent people are willing to seek out the truth versus just stay comfortable with what they know,” said University of Illinois psychology professor Dolores Albarracín, PhD, who led the study with University of Florida researcher William Hart, PhD. The team also included researchers from Northwestern University and Ohio University.
The studies they reviewed generally asked participants about their views on a given topic and then allowed them to choose whether they wanted to view or read information supporting their own or an opposing point of view.
The researchers found that people are about twice as likely to select information that supports their own point of view (67 percent) as to consider an opposing idea (33 percent). Certain individuals, those with close-minded personalities, are even more reluctant to expose themselves to differing perspectives, Albarracín said. They will opt for the information that corresponds to their views nearly 75 percent of the time.
The researchers also found, not surprisingly, that people are more resistant to new points of view when their own ideas are associated with political, religious or ethical values. “If you are really committed to your own attitude – for example, if you are a very committed Democrat – you are more likely to seek congenial information, that is, information that corresponds with your views,” Albarracín said.
“If the issues concern moral values or politics, about 70 percent of the time you will choose congenial information, versus about 60 percent of the time if the issues are not related to values.”
Perhaps more surprisingly, people who have little confidence in their own beliefs are less likely to expose themselves to contrary views than people who are very confident in their own ideas, Albarracín said.
Certain factors can also induce people to seek out opposing points of view, she said. Those who may have to publicly defend their ideas, such as politicians, for example, are more motivated to learn about the views of those who oppose them. In the process, she said, they sometimes find that their own ideas evolve.
People are also more likely to expose themselves to opposing ideas when it is useful to them in some way, Albarracín said. “If you’re going to buy a house and you really like the house, you’re still going to have it inspected,” she said. Similarly, no matter how much you like your surgeon, you may seek out a second opinion before scheduling a major operation, she said.
For the most part, it seems that people tend to stay with their own beliefs and attitudes because changing those might prevent them from living the lives they’re living,” Albarracín said. “But it’s good news that one out of three times, or close to that, they are willing to seek out the other side.”
Article: “Feeling Validated Versus Being Correct: A Meta-Analysis of Selective Exposure to Information,” Dolores Albarracín, PhD, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign; William Hurt, PhD, Inge Brechan, PhD, and Lisa Merrill, PhD, University of Florida; Alice H. Eagly, PhD, Northwestern University, Matthew J. Lindberg, PhD, Ohio University; Psychological Bulletin, Vol. 135, No. 4.
For the most part, it seems that people tend to stay with their own beliefs and attitudes because changing those might prevent them from living the lives they’re living,” Albarracín said. “But it’s good news that one out of three times, or close to that, they are willing to seek out the other side.”
Its like DR.Charlton said in summary”I noticed decades ago people don’t really want debates anymore”
i knew that when almost everyone started segregating themselves between CNN & FOXNEWS (then much later FOX wasn’t ”good” enough so BlazeTV & NEWSMAX had to be watched instead as FOX was ”too liberal”{-as even Michael Savage was saying by 2006 or so-i still have some audio cassette of various shows(but haven’t played them in some 15 years) i taped of him back then, namely his compilation shows which had his ”best moments” on them-”FOX is just CNN from a decade ago”}in the late 90s or even in wrestling-WWF versus (WCW) BUT to was really WCWS NWO(which like Ric Fair & the 4 HorseMEN in the NWA=National Wrestling Organization in the 1980s was the main reason for watching WCW) wrestling faction-the NWO classic black & white logo t-shirt still sells GREAT even though the faction as a ”dominant” faction was over for most intents and purposes in early 1998(instead of May 199 when talk of it-as well as any body that was wrestler wearing the t-Shirts, just vanished from their TV shows)-
when it broke two separate factions ”red & black” sounds a bit familiar to the manosphere when its two main factions are either ”red” (when PUAgame was KING like Roissy=Heartiste was for PUAgame-remember Rollo essentially claims game-in general NOT PUA game like Keoni/Dave did) or ”black”(mainly other than whatever is ”red”-e.g.trendy at the time- at the moment-which was game up until late 2015-
then ”they” tried to merge Doug Wilson’s version of MR.ROGERS(PUBLIC IMAGE) of ”Patriarchy” with GBFMS more lone warrior -like eccentric Patriarchy-neither of which are really compatible with each other let alone biblical generroles=bgr=larry solomon=matt perkins highly inflammatory(to especially Jesse Powell TFA’s ”secular patriarchy”-let alone Doug Wilson’s version of MR.ROGERS(PUBLIC IMAGE) of ”Patriarchy” versus GBFMS more
lone warrior -like eccentric Patriarchy ) trolling ”Patriarchy”-
which is popular mainly because ”Conservatives” on the ”redpill”osphere see it as the next ”logical” step in what they see & consider as pornographic aspects of PUAgame-but i just see fallen people being fallen people instead of seeing everything outside of MR.ROGERS(PUBLIC IMAGE) & MR.MCMAHON=MR Trump’s StrongMAN window
as somehow pornographic when it’s just fallen people being fallen people (like all of Ric Flair’s boasting of getting women was for i too back then & today.}
Also relevant about (public image)” good guys” that are anything but ”good guys” with higher than average I.Q. mainly for our friend MOD to read:
https://www.foxnews.com/world/yemen-billionaires-son-reportedly-admits-involvement-london-rape-murder-norwegian-student-15-years-ago
The son of a Yemeni billionaire who fled the United Kingdom 15 years ago reportedly admitted to his involvement in the 2008 murder and rape of a Norwegian fellow student in London.
The BBC reported that Farouk Abdulhak recently admitted to his involvement in the March 14, 2008, death of 23-year-old Martine Vik Magnussen.
The two were students at Regent’s Business School in London at the time. During thousands of texts and hundreds of voice notes to BBC News Arabic special correspondent Nawal Al-Maghafi, Abdulhak allegedly claimed Magnussen, without mentioning her by name, died as a result of a “sex accident gone wrong.”
“I did something when I was younger, it was a mistake,” he reportedly wrote.
Most ”Conservatives” would agree it was ”a mistake” as they would be viewing him through this ”The son of a Yemeni billionaire” non-”prejudicial”-”love of God’s justice” RP=BP lenz as ”the RP=BP ones” say.
owever, a coroner’s report detailed how violently Magnussen died, and Abdulhak remains wanted for murder by London’s Metropolitan Police Service.
The report stated her body had 43 cuts and grazes, “many of them typical of assault type injuries or those received in a struggle.” The Norwegian student died due to “compression to the neck” which “could mean she was strangled, held down or smothered,” the coroner wrote.
Magnussen’s father, Odd Petter Magnussen, reacted to MailOnline about Abdulhak’s admission.
“It’s a gamechanger. He’s no longer a suspect, he’s now a killer,” the grieving father said. “That changes the whole perspective in Yemen from a political point of view and with regards to his family, who may now be able to put more pressure on him.”
The United Kingdom holds no extradition treaty with Yemen.
“I’ve been talking to both the legally elected government and the Houthi movement, who control the area where he is residing,” the father said. “We’ve had a dialogue with them for the last one and a half years, and they’ve managed to pinpoint a possible solution within a year.”
i bet that (billionaire)” father ” sees the whole thing as just ”a mistake” too with the most likely ”MKULTRA LANGLY”(as fedpiller RP Genius Leaders say)-based ”report stated her body had 43 cuts and grazes, “many of them typical of assault type injuries or those received in a struggle.” The Norwegian student died due to “compression to the neck” which “could mean she was strangled, held down or smothered,”
Is it NOT likely what this wimminz says here, why so many MEN claim to be INTJS(& NOT the more closely associated version of them , known as a-holes?:
https://www.quora.com/Are-INTJs-the-least-liked
Profile photo for Kya Pauley
Kya Pauley
INTJ-AAuthor has 147 answers and 1.5M answer views5y
I wouldn’t say we’re the least liked, but I can definitely see why a lot of people don’t like INTJs.
Hell, I don’t like INTJs.
INTJs can be some of the most autofellatio, self absorbed, I-come-across-as-an-asshole-but-it’s-just-because-I’m-too-smart-for-everyone-else, special aloof snowflakey people out there. I strongly dislike admitting that I am one because we have a very negative, yet very well deserved reputation.
Seriously, I saw a post here earlier about what animal each MBTI type would be and while all the other types had normal animals, they said INTJ = dragon.
I am still rolling my eyes several hours later.
Even some of the other answers to this question… “INTJs can be really honest and blunt” – there’s a difference between being honest and just being an a-hole. “INTJs are rare and different and people don’t like the unknown” – oh come on.
It’s not that you’re so smart that people are cowed by your awe-inspiring intelligence and mysterious sense of cool – no dude, you have a chronic case of resting bitch face, seem disinterested in other people and ‘lesser’ things, don’t talk, and when you do talk you come off as short tempered and impatient.
Yes, we’re fanatically loyal and can be pretty decent people if you give us a chance, but I absolutely see why most people don’t bother. I wouldn’t, either.
but-it’s-just-because-I’m-too-smart-for-everyone-else
That isn’t the reputation that MOST who claim to be an INTJ want, even a certain one that wanted us to make it easy to declare them a ”Genius” nearly a year ago?
Otherwise maybe as she even hints at above they could be seen as just a-holes as the ”Genius” one told Derek over a year ago at Spawnys”if I walks like a a-hole,talk like a whole then by golly miss molly , I have to admit,Derek, I must be a a-hole bro!!”😉
Remember that Derek?
Backaround November ’23 at Spawnys-when the above mentioned ”Genius” essentially wanted us to ”tell ME I’m a Genius” was especially acting all prissy & more that basically Spawnys was their site=domain as in ””LORD” of it ”as they do everywhere else they go?
This why i liked Scott’s policy of ”notice i NEVER mention a number for my I.Q. in these discussions online?” as he use to say at some blog called Σ Frame?
I do not remember that. I must have missed it. Maybe I’ll look for it later.
It’s been a long time since I took the test (at a work seminar) but I’m pretty sure it was ISTJ with a VERY strong skew (as in 30 out of 30) to the “S” sensing side. 28 out of 30 in the introverted.
As far as big 5, I am very high in neuroticism, conscientiousness and agreeableness and very low in openness and extraversion.
I took the Evaluations of Attractiveness Scales (female) test and I have a strong preference for conventional feminine beauty (as opposed to “novelty”) and a very strong reaction against overt female sexuality. LoL – I guess that’s the Amish girl. I have an extremely viscerally negative reaction to female tattooing and probably at some point offended (unintentionally) a couple of the men in the sphere with my remarks about tattoos.
I also took the short dark triad and narcissist personality inventory. I scored as low as you can on narcissism (literally “0” pn both tests) and extremely low in Machiavellianism and psychopathy (1st and 2nd percentile I think).
https://openpsychometrics.org/
As far as the classic “Four Temperaments” test, I’m definitely a pure Melancholic.
Cameron,
All that is quite interesting and reveals a bit about who you are. A little bit anyway.
The fact that you are just outside the Manosphere triad (INTJ, INTP, INFJ), but within the quartet (+ ISTJ), probably explains why you’ve never really found a home in the Manosphere, but are still more-or-less welcome there. It also probably explains why you are willing to comment on this blog.
Meanwhile, I’m two or three steps away from INTJ, which makes me a true alien to the Manosphere. Given the unforgiving nature of typical male INTJ, you can see why certain individuals have great trouble interacting with me without resorting to personal attacks.
Huh, I bet every person who has ever called me a liar is an INTJ, and always after I made an argument that refuted some important viewpoint that they held.
Peace,
DR
I do remember headhunter, from out of nowhere, jumping all over Jason when Jason asked me a question about my son (which I didn’t take offense to). It seemed that headhunter took offense on my behalf or had some grudge against Jason that just kinda exploded out of nowhere.
CAM,
You mean about i think the growth hormones stuff, where you were worried your son might be too short?
i remember that, BUT headhunter taking offense on your behalf was most likely a combination of him having custody of his own two sons{i go to his site often as were friends, and when he first showed up at Dalrock some of the commenters (namely Caldo who could at times be highly aggressive to others himself, ask Derek for one) were making ridiculous remarks to him about spanking(really the much more extreme version that is clearly child abuse) young children(he said he had ”no problem with a quick swat on the butt to get a child’s attention” though)-which headhunter himself has had to take up for at his official hospital/medical job-testifying to severe physical abuse on very small boys(&girls)-mainly as that is who 9 out of ten times, MEN & women usually take out all their aggression out on-as it is ”approved” by society & the government as WE all know.
https://www.nationalchildrensalliance.org/media-room/national-statistics-on-child-abuse/
Child abuse hurts minds, bodies, and futures.
The trauma of child abuse causes children to lose their sense of safety and trust in the world, and harms their relationships. Left untreated, the trauma of child abuse can lead to:
Mental health problems like depression, anxiety and PTSD symptoms;
Behavioral changes like substance use disorders, risky sexual behaviors, or increased risk for violence against oneself and others; and/or
Physical health problems like infections, injuries, or even heart disease or diabetes later in life.
Headhunter in his official capacity knows the above better than most people is the main point which is why he defended you(but really your son) wanting to help your son not be seen as ”weak” by his ”peers” who might see him as an easy target to beat up on because of his short stature without the growth hormones.
Yes that was the interaction. Jason asked me why we didn’t accept that God made our son how he is. I wasn’t offended by Jason’s question. My son decided he didn’t want to be stuck in the stomach with a needle every night so we accepted his decision not to continue growth hormone therapy.
Deti says he is an ISTJ. I always got along with him and liked him. The only difference we had was when I told him he was a good man – he did not react well to this.
I thought he also said he was INTJ. He wouldn’t be the only one to claim multiple scores. It happens. But I cannot verify, so it must be wrong. I’ve removed the reference.
Thanks for the correction.
He could be near neutral on the S-N dimension. It was scored as +/- 30 points when I took it- I pegged the needle at 30 on “sensing.”
Perhaps, but this is likely just an error on my part. Simple as that. And easily corrected.
I do wonder if ISTJ are more common in the sphere than INFJ. INTJ is clearly dominate, but it is less clear which of ISTJ, INFJ, and INTP are the most common secondaries. The Dalrock data isn’t exactly a full sample.
Clearly the Manosphere is full of introverts. That is beyond question. For example, I have yet to see any ENTJ show up.
In my former work group, which was an analysis group primarily consisting of modeling and simulation work, ISTJ was by far the most common. Men and women.
We did the “Social Styles” course as well. “Analytical” was the most common social style. I am an analytical but also move into the “amiable” quadrant frequently. I’m not “expressive” and definitely not “driver.”
Earl, another person I got along with, was also an ISTJ.
I wonder what Scott is. To me, he seemed different than most of the men. Not an introvert.
CAM,
About Scott, i think it really did do a number on his mind that a once-virgin ”reserved”
,” Conservative” & ”Christian”(church of Christ) woman who had pledged to be his wife(his first wife), would get into the notorious ”left behind” military wives(& husbands)cheating stuff(which led to him and his first wife divorcing) as spoken about here on-general:
https://www.reddit.com/r/TooAfraidToAsk/comments/px34n1/is_there_more_truth_than_joke_behind_military/
r/TooAfraidToAsk icon
Go to TooAfraidToAsk
r/TooAfraidToAsk
•
4 yr. ago
Mega_Nidoking
Is there more truth than joke behind military wives and infidelity?
Love & Dating
I have family in the military as well as a few friends in the reserves but I’ve never wanted to ask this for fear it might bring some bad memories up. I know we make jokes about military wives cheating all the time but is it really as bad as all that? Or is it just that it gets a lot of attention when it does happen?
Question_Few
•
4y ago
•
Edited 4y ago
Profile Badge for the Achievement Top 1% Commenter Top 1% Commenter
Yes dude. What we don’t mention is that infidelity goes both ways. Sure you have to worry about jody but many a man has fallen victim to deployment goggles and landed himself in hot water as a result. You can be gone anywhere from a few weeks to a year and during that time you’re surrounded by a few other girls and your significant other is surrounded by literally hundreds of other dudes. All of which are in shape. Have varying personalities and all going after the same girl. What did you expect to happen?
The sad truth is that people in the military get married far too young. Throw two hormonal teenagers into a base filled with hormonal teenagers. Add in fitness, testosterone and limited supervision and you have a recipe for disaster. Cheating is common in the military, so is divorce and domestic violence. The military is not a great environment for relationships and Jody is always watching.
Heed my advice. Don’t bang your troops, Don’t buy some ridiculous car you can’t afford and don’t propose to your high school sweetheart as soon as you get out of boot camp.
Upvote
317
shadyshadok
•
4y ago
Who is jody?
Upvote
64
u/Question_Few avatar
Question_Few
•
4y ago
Profile Badge for the Achievement Top 1% Commenter Top 1% Commenter
It’s an old military joke. Jody is the guy that your spouse cheated on you with.
To Scott of course it wasn’t a joke but a fact of his life, hence why he seemed different than most of the men.
Not an introvert.
I’m NOT either BUT my extroverted ness comes with a nearly equal desire to be left alone with my own thoughts{especially since i was a 7yo kid(which has bothered a certain guy who comes here to yell at Derek & i, since 2021 that he has never experienced something similar like that from a woman,as if being envious of what happened to another guy, will change his situation by the way he has acted for the last 3+ years of his foolish talk against i & what he says ”my 7-year old girlfriend” which i NEVER have said, BUT see what i did say was ”since i was a 7yo kid”(where is the age of the girl in that statement?)-
that guy twists whatever he hears from those he deems his ”enemies” of the red pill ”faith” e.g. Scott(of course), Derek, (sometimes mainly in 2019 & 2021)JASON, that ”moderately red pill” ED Kennedy guy/commenter at his main site-who he banned for ”being too feminist”(sound familiar to his usual talk?) for NOT slamming women to his liking} & myself since ”officially” late December ’21)being with a girl who understands how i roll😉}.
The story he told was that his first wife cheated on him with a balding janitor.
INTJ me. It is true.
This is a casual text from our ENTJ son:
“I want to try to take advantage of market makers hedging and rebalancing their inventory on public exchanges after internalizing retail orders in their alternate trade systems, I think there’s a predictable pattern in how it’s done when retail and institutional order flows diverge from each other.
I’ve been parsing CSV files with historical market data for a few ETFs, and order flow on public exchanges doesn’t seem to match what you’d expect based on book depth, liquidity, spreads and fee/rebate patterns-my hypothesis is that this is happing because of off-exchange rebalancing, but regardless I think there’s something exploitable here”
He’s like Michael Burry (hedge fund manager of Big Short fame), but smarter.
That’s pretty funny. I can’t imagine texting that kind of thing to my mother. LOL.
Heh it’s a group text. Think they forget I’m on it. 😂
I am ISTJ married to ENTJ, which is all kinds of interesting. But none of this feels as static to me as people seem to think it is. At least half the time I am very INTJ-ish, and about 1/3 of the time, situationally of course, SAM can seem very ENTP-ish.
One of my issues with all of these things (Myers-Brigg, Enneagram, Love Languages etc) is that they are often used as excuses for bucking up and doing the things that we actually CAN do but don’t want to because it doesn’t suit our sensibilities. Grown up life, as well as community life, is all about extending ourselves beyond our comfort zones for the greater need of ourselves and others.
And yes, I find Myers Briggs, Big Five, et al roughly the same type of psychobabble as the love languages, LOL.
Elspeth,
I believe you said all of your children are introverts? I have three extroverts.
Oh, I 100% agree that personalities are not static things. Would you believe that I was once a strong introvert? I was a partial INFP (Mediator) and I was very much the mediator of conflict among my peers, if you can believe that too.
I underwent a couple personal sea change events (once in high school and once as an adult) that dramatically altered my personality. Those events rocked me to my core and I became a very different from the person I once was.
Nevertheless, you can’t deny the legitimacy of personality tests when 85% of a group has the same personality and this is repeatable across multiple contexts. Especially when that personality is one of the rarest out there.
Personality tests may not be great at predicting long-term outcomes (i.e. a low correlation), but they absolutely predict the Manosphere to an absurdly high degree.
The real question is, to what extent is personality the causative factor in many Manosphere men’s troubles?
Peace,
DR
Well, that’s another thing Elspeth and I have in common.
I wonder how much it’s a matter of INTJ’s being drawn to the fringe of what’s discussible and so they’re drawn to these sort of websites. Rather than it being a matter of INTJ’s creating their problems and ending up here. I wonder how much they are drawn to text based articles and discussions – the video format seems to be so much more popular.
New commenter E. mentioned how “silly” the manosphere looks but I keep hearing their themes everywhere (including from my sons who I have NEVER shared sphere ideas with) so it seems like the ideas are spreading quickly for something that looks silly to outsiders.
I’ve experienced both of what you refer to.
Whenever anyone outside the Manosphere talks about it, it almost always with derision.
The ideas are not being spread by the Dalrockian Manosphere, they are being spread from the secular Manosphere and they are not being spun in the same light. It’s men like Andrew Tate driving the narrative, and he is hardly being viewed in a positive light. I see his name pop up all the time, and it’s hardly ever in glowing terms. He’s infamous.
What are your sons noticing?
I see the young men talking about alphas, betas, sigmas ,etc. I see them talking about “Chads” and “Gigachads”, “incels”, etc. it seems the jargon has become common and popular.
At least in my area, the kids have no idea what a Sigma actually is. It’s a word they use, but they use it differently than it is used in the Manosphere.
All the terms are being stolen and rendered something different that vaguely corresponds to Red Pill concepts, but is now has a life of its own.
It’s just like how the Manosphere corrupted hypergamy. The kids are stealing and corrupting twrms that Red Pill uses.
Incel is as meaningless as creepy. They are almost used interchangeably.
There’s also an enormous amount of video content, much more popular than text based blogs. It seems the Dalrockian manosphere is a pretty small thing with limited readership.
It always has been small and limited.
I suppose. I’ve heard “alpha” and seen kids pass around “gigachad” memes – I’m not sure how they’d misappropriate these terms. I’m watching a youtube short from the Karate Kid reboot and the main character is advising young boys to be a jerk to girls because it’s “an alpha move” and “girls love it” or some such.
The alpha/beta terminology predates the Manosphere.
We watched 1983 E.T. where they use the term “charisma” instead of rizz. Some things really don’t change much.
Two of our five are quite extroverted, actually. The other three are more like me: introverted, but able to navigate socially well enough to make friends and have a social life. They just enjoy their alone time when it’s over.
As for your closing question, I believe all ideological affinity groups tend to be self-selecting, self-propagating, and to some degree, self-fulfilling. Not just the manosphere. All. This includes our Reformed, Classical Christian home educating community. When you’re around your people all the time, you can forget that there are other perspectives, experiences, and possible solutions to common problems.
That said, I actually agree pretty strongly that modern western woman (including many inside the church but not all) have been pretty badly formed by the combination of modernity and the erasure of sexual norms. I believe that Scripture’s admonition that women are more easily deceived than men is demonstrably true as well.
What I DON’T agree with is that modern men writ large are of better character than the women, and that if women all started behaving that all would be right with the world. Scripture doesn’t seem to point in that direction at all.
But….we’re in a church that can, will, and has excommunicated women in the 4 years that we’ve been there. The women in our church, including the singles, are pretty well-behaved, at least as far as can be seen from the congregation. So again, self-selected group.
Well said
When I encountered Dalrock the message I saw was that men are bad, that we know this because feminism and the mainstream never stops reminding us of this, but that women are bad also. There are certain commenters that tend towards what you write here but I never took “men=good, women=bad” to be the Dalrockian narrative.
A major theme was also that, bad or good, many women tend to pick obviously bad men and aren’t exactly competing over decent men.
This is one reason why I have always rejected the concept of hypergamy as an overriding principle.
Charlton would say it is because evolution has wired us to be unable to select our mates for ourselves. Arranged marriages are the way it should be.
CAM,
Did you ever go to ”White & Nerdy’s”/ omegavirginrevolt/”blackpill”(the one that popularized it to mean” There is no personal solution to systemic problems, and feminism/women is a systemic problem.” site/blog when Jack had the (dead-since i think early 2022)link to it before this past summer, when he took down most of his redpill/manosphere site links?
i found the link to it around 2012 at a ”moderate”/skeptical playa ”manosphere site run by an Indian-parents from india ( but born in America) gamer that i can’t remember the name of right now, but he was friends with that TFH/Anon guy that famously use to go after JASON at Dalrock(& Boxers) between around summer 2016 to summer 2020 who claimed he must have gotten ran over in D.C. sometime in late 2015(when he mysteriously stopped blogging where they both were like Roissy).Anyway ”White & Nerdy’s omegavirginrevolt/”blackpill”/MAN in the orbiting castle is like the prototype of what Derek’s blog is with i & JASON here, e.g. skeptical about what the manosphere says is ”definitely TRUE”(but where is the studies to back them up that too many outsiders will demand of them)?!
Like the following one of-which is one of my FAVE posts from the White & Nerdy’s omegavirginrevolt/”blackpill”/MAN in the orbiting castle blog{back when game and Roissy were still KING of the sphere with tens of thousands still trying to copy his success-”Patriarchy” and every MAN get married didn’t really become mainstream until most young manosphere MEN left and formed the blackpillosphere-mainly on youtube to get away from married MEN pushing them towards ”marriage with game”-when most of them were barely happy with”dating with game” -where most ideas of the oldsphere became popular and inserted into stuff like the Karate Kid show you mentioned.}
https://web.archive.org/web/20130728041414/http://omegavirginrevolt.wordpress.com/2013/07/21/player-burnout-an-excuse-to-exit-the-so-called-manosphere
Posted by The Black Pill on July 21, 2013
Eventually, many men realize that (Roissyite) game if not the entirety of the so called manosphere is bunk. A man can only deal with increasing insanity needed to believe in (Roissyite) game and all other red pill BS for so long. Eventually, either he realizes that red pill BS is absurd, or he completely cracks and goes into deeper levels of insanity (which is a subject for another blog post). The typical way for a manospherian to deal with the realization that red pill ideology is BS is just to completely disappear one day adding to the missing manospherians that the manosphere quickly forgets about.
One thing I have noticed lately is an increase in the so called manosphere of talk about “player burnout”. “Player burnout” is exactly what it says. Supposedly, all these gamers eventually get tired of massive amounts of sex with lots of women. As has been written about extensively on this blog, (Roissyite) gamers aren’t getting laid. So, they can’t be suffering from “player burnout” if they aren’t getting laid. Then we have to ask, what is really behind the uptick in talk about “player burnout”?
What’s going on is that these men taking about “player burnout” have either realized that the ideology of the so called manosphere is BS or are on the verge of doing so. “Player burnout” is a way for these men to exit the manosphere without just vanishing one day (although the net effect will be the same). The difference is that these men need to rationalize their exit so they use “player burnout” as their excuse.
That is clearly before ”MEN are desperate for marriage” became the ”mainstream” narrative used by guys like Jack.
“player burnout” stopped being talked about by the late 2010s in the overly sanitized-for-married-men sphere because even if it was TRUE it was uncouth and NOT civilized or ”Biblical” like ”gaming your wife” apparently was.
Read the comments in that post and see how different the whole sphere(& its related ones) was then.
Like these ones:
handbanana says:
July 21, 2013 at 5:54 am
they finally realized that they need a rational sounding explanation for why they keep shutting their sites down and wiping the archives.
Reply
AlekNovy says:
July 21, 2013 at 6:51 am
Thing is its not even original. It’s been the go-to reason since the community was first founded.
It’s how the very first gurus a decade ago had to rationalize out not demonstrating their super-magical powers.
Online: I got super magical powers
Offline: Ooops, now that I’m becoming famous I have to actually demonstrate my claims in real life
OOOOOHHHHHH “I now have a girlfriend, and well, I can’t talk to other women or demonstrate my magical powers because its not fair to my girlfriend”
“Why did I get a girlfriend when I could have threesomes everynight with a different woman effortlessly, oh man player burnout, I just had to get some rest…”
Reply
The Black Pill says:
July 21, 2013 at 1:32 pm
The ironic thing is that in the so called manosphere, many of them are (supposedly) using game in LTRs and marriages. Thus, it makes even less sense.
AlekNovy (further above)is/was what could be called a regular non-manospheric street PUAgamer from the U.K.
Professor, a couple of times I’ve pointed out that “Roosh” and “Roissy” could be lying fakes duping people. How would anyone know if they were lying about being successful “pickup artists.”
Someone suggested that what these sort of guys do is literally spend tons of time at this activity and end of trying many hundreds of times. Even if they’re successful only a small fraction of the time it still ends up being a fair number of women.
The idea of casual sex with a stranger is repugnant to me.
Yeah I don’t know – Charlton is an evolutionary biologist whereas I’m an idiot internet commenter. In his evolutionary view, I don’t understand how the great number of arranged marriages throughout history would weight our evolutionary psychology vs. the very long, primal history of people breeding in baboon-pack-like conditions.
But….we’re in a church that can, will, and has excommunicated women in the 4 years that we’ve been there. The women in our church, including the singles, are pretty well-behaved, at least as far as can be seen from the congregation. So again, self-selected group.
Elspeth remember when ‘ole DAL’ said this:?
” I’ve been asking=searching if anyone knows of JUST one church that holds to Biblical standards for women and will enforce them too, and NOT even one person has been able to do it!?”
That search originally began in late 2010 or so.
But if DAL ‘ came back to blogging, would you set him straight on the whole ” I’ve been asking=searching if anyone knows of JUST one church that holds to Biblical standards for women and will enforce them too, and NOT even one person has been able to do it!?”PLEASE?😉
THANKS IN ADVANCE, E(as ‘ole Pseudonominous commenter since 2011 calls you).😉😊😇😎
Yeah, there’s NO way putting the name of my church online for anyone to know any more about me than what I’ve already shared, which is waaayyy too much.
In both cases, the discipline was for divorces that do not meet the Biblical standard for being unbound from one’s spouse. I recognize that in this particular group there is no such thing as a standard which allows divorce.
I only mentioned it as a counter to the oft-repeated assertion that there are no churches anywhere in the whole of the western world outside of Amish/Fundamentalist/Mennonite types (we are none of these) that hold women accountable. It’s particularly noteworthy because there are a couple of ways in which our church is not as conservative as I would prefer, but there is a real and true and vigorous effort to uphold the Scripture and its teachings as paramount.
There is no such thing as a perfect church, because all churches are a family of redeemed sinners working out their salvation with fear and trembling (if it’s a good church).
…and…
Meanwhile, I’m an actual confirmed person (unlike many of the writers in the Manosphere).
My entire family was featured in a printed newspaper article in the Philadelphia Inquirer.
My picture has been in a major magazine and there are a number of magazines, journals, etc. that name me.
I once did a post here on this blog where I discussed one of my church’s sermons. I named names.
I actually received a letter in the mail once—about one of my photos on Wikipedia—from someone who found me online. Some old lady had found my address easily enough. I presume anyone with even a modicum of skill could do the same. It’s not like it’s a secret.
At this point, I couldn’t go back to anonymity even if I wanted to.
There are people online who have met me, been in my home, etc. Hearthie and I for example, met for the very first time 3 years ago (after a 14-year online relationship) when my kids surprised me by flying her out here for my birthday party. I’ve met several other women as well, and my husband has been okay with that.
Revealing my full identity within this sphere however, is a horse of a different color, if you will. I actually believe there is a place for anonymity online, and reason to be cautious about going public.
I certainly appreciate your position, and am thankful for the people who share my view and are so situated that they can be a public face of what I view as righteousness, sanity and plain old common sense. I am just not free to be one of those people.
Agreed, Elspeth. Well said.
I liken it to locking your front door.
Can someone break in anyway? Yes, and pretty easily.
Yet I still lock the door because it is more secure.
I do sometimes let people I trust in my “house” though.
I used this analogy to try to convince Scott that anonymity is good if you’re making money from the government in particular and could lost your job or even end up prosecuted, worse case (when he was active duty), at his old blog.
That is awesome about Hearthie! We just spoke to someone from the old sphere yesterday, we’ve kept in touch with him (he stopped posting in the sphere many years ago, we exchanged numbers back when our son was going through that deep depression and have done the group chat thing with Mike and him).
To be clear, my belief is that Christians should avoid anonymity, but no Christian is generally-speaking inherently obligated to reveal personal information. This, at least, means that we should not be using false names. But, in theory, both of you are using your supposed actual first names (or valid nicknames), so this does not apply.
However, for Christian teachers this is a different thing entirely, because of the requirement to be accountable to the body of Christ. Anonymity is antithetical to that duty.
Try holding Christian manosphere teachers accountable. I have. It’s not possible because their anonymity shields them from scrutiny and correction by the body of Christ.
During the time of persecution by the Romans, Cyprian of Carthage described how the church had begun using water instead of wine during communion. The reason? The persecutors were identifying Christians by the wine on their breath. Cyprian equated the drinking of water during communion with being ashamed of—or outright denying—Christ.
I’m sure the water-drinkers thought it was common sense to avoid being tortured, killed, or having their family members suffer the same.
The Christian’s desire to avoid suffering and persecution is, at best, a secondary concern. Those who place it at the primary position have failed to “hate” their father and mother and follow Christ. It’s a matter of priority, not of legalism.
The Christian’s desire to avoid suffering and persecution is, at best, a secondary concern. Those who place it at the primary position have failed to “hate” their father and mother and follow Christ. It’s a matter of priority, not of legalism.
Is this is NOT what i have spoken of as preparing children for what adults(forgetting all the meaness and cruelty they witnessed themselves as children by other children and adults) see as a children’s G-rated world of ”sunshine, singing, and dancing” instead of an adult(& for many children) world of pain, suffering and regret like in Rod Waves Boys Don’t cry song from ’23, that i love:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-Hu_Q4W8M6g
Boyz Don’t Cry
Song by Rod Wave ‧ 2023
Lyrics
Oh-whoa, oh-whoa
Look, uh
Tour bus slidin’ in the rain, headed out of state
So much goin’ through my brain, I can barely think
Sometimes I get on my own and wander outer space
I love you, but I’m full of rage, our past is full of pain
On a planet of my own, livin’ like an alien
Think it’s safe to say that I’ll never be the same again
Never’ll fall in love again, my heart is on a shelf
My music’s full of pain, but I keep my problems to myself
And I keep my mouth closed ’cause my thoughts sometimes can get too deep
My heart cold, my eyes closed, but I never go to sleep
I been all alone goin’ on two weeks me, mysеlf, and my sheets
Wanna call your phone so we can speak, but it makе me feel weak
Get on the internet and see the world laugh ’bout my depression
They paintin’ perfect pictures, but I ain’t buyin’ what they sellin’
Collect calls from the county always could make me smile
Damn, brother, you was just on the streets, and now you goin’ to trial
Yeah, momma, I made it out the skreets, I hope you finally proud
Youngin’ jump out with that ‘K, in broad day, shootin’ at the crowd
Now he gettin’ on top the stage, and they sing his music loud
Sing his music out loud
Take away my name, take away my throne
Take away my fame, let me keep my soul
Smilin’ on the outside, inside dyin’
Listenin’ to a grown man cryin’
Oh-whoa, oh-whoa
Oh-whoa, oh-whoa
Oh-whoa, oh-whoa
Oh-whoa
SEE those lyrics? They remind you of a least a few RP guys WE know?
From the time i knew of CHRIST & his execution by crucifixion i ”intuitively” (in a little boy ‘s way of thinking, that is) knew these verses went along with them in the follower of CHRISTS’S life:
Be Strong
2 So you, my son, be strong [constantly strengthened] and empowered in the grace that is [to be found only] in Christ Jesus. 2 The things [the doctrine, the precepts, the admonitions, the sum of my ministry] which you have heard me teach [a]in the presence of many witnesses, entrust [as a treasure] to reliable and faithful men who will also be capable and qualified to teach others. 3 Take with me your share of hardship [passing through the difficulties which you are called to endure], like a good soldier of Christ Jesus. 4 No soldier in active service gets entangled in the [ordinary business] affairs of civilian life; [he avoids them] so that he may please the one who enlisted him to serve. 5 And if anyone competes as an athlete [in competitive games], he is not crowned [with the wreath of victory] unless he competes according to the rules. 6 The hard-working farmer [who labors to produce crops] ought to be the first to receive his share of the crops. 7 Think over the things I am saying [grasp their application], for the Lord will grant you insight and understanding in everything.
8 Remember Jesus Christ [the ever-living Lord who has] risen from the dead, [as the prophesied King] descended from David [king of Israel], according to my gospel [the good news that I preach], 9 for that [gospel] I am suffering even to [the point of] wearing chains like a criminal; but the word of God is not chained or imprisoned! 10 For this reason I [am ready to] patiently endure all things for the sake of those who are the elect (God’s chosen ones), so that they too may obtain the salvation which is in Christ Jesus and with it the reward of eternal glory. 11 This is a faithful and trustworthy saying:
If we died with Him, we will also live with Him;
12
If we endure, we will also reign with Him;
If we deny Him, He will also deny us;
13
If we are faithless, He remains faithful [true to His word and His righteous character], for He cannot deny Himself.
An Unashamed Workman
14 Remind the people of these facts, and solemnly charge them in the presence of God to avoid petty controversy over words, which does no good, and [upsets and undermines and] ruins [the faith of] those who listen. 15 Study and do your best to present yourself to God approved, a workman [tested by trial] who has no reason to be ashamed, accurately handling and skillfully teaching the word of truth. 16 But avoid all irreverent babble and godless chatter [with its profane, empty words], for it will lead to further ungodliness, 17 and their teaching will spread like gangrene. So it is with Hymenaeus and Philetus, 18 who have deviated from the truth. They claim that the resurrection has already taken place, and they undermine the faith of some. 19 Nevertheless, the firm foundation of God [which He has laid] stands [sure and unshaken despite attacks], bearing this seal: “The Lord knows those who are His,” and, “Let everyone who names the name of the Lord stand apart from wickedness and withdraw from wrongdoing.”-2 Timothy 2-Amplified Bible
i was preparing myself (in a less complex way than as an adult would)for an adult world of pain, suffering, and regret(like when i was separated by life itself (NOT of hers or my ”choosing”)from my first girlfriend.
But i was thinking(in a much more limited way, as i was much younger before when i first thought about it) of such before she ever came along so i can see why an adult in their 20s,30s, or 40s would think they are trapped in ”the matrix.” of blue and red pills.
As their parents prepared them, for what adults(forgetting all the meaness and cruelty they witnessed themselves as children by other children and adults as a kid ) see as a children’s G-rated world of ”sunshine, singing, and dancing” like in a MGM musical or Disney film(neither of which i ever liked(even as a kid) much-suprise right?) instead of an adult(& for many children) world of pain, suffering and regret.
See why i ”get” DR. Bruce Charton so much, too?
I use part of my name -though since my dad died, I’m no longer called that except by mom and sis. I’m not a big fan of goofy online nicknames.
Several people in the sphere know my real name so they can easily verify who I am on linkedin, etc. Very unique name – me and my son are the only ones in the world with our name.
Well Jason was on The Price is Right, so we know he’s real!!
I should say that several people know my FULL name. “Cameron” is real.
A majority of commenters on this blog either use their full name, first name, or include their name in their private email address (which I don’t disclose). I’m aware of the identity of a number of others (including someone who accidentally doxed themselves a few months ago).
I mean I don’t think I’d have a cow. What’s someone going to do – call my lousy job and tell them they have a sexist working there? I worked alongside a convicted felon drug dealer from the St. Paul ghetto for many months. Nobody wants to work in steel – dirty, hard work. They gotta take what they can get.
Revealing my full identity within this sphere however, is a horse of a different color, if you will. I actually believe there is a place for anonymity online, and reason to be cautious about going public.
Oh, i fully agree with you.
You know that Matt Forney RP witer guy under his original site/name(infamalad-i NEVER actually saw the site really- or something remember Dalrock would mention the name of it on his earlier posts as it was the main aggregator back between ’09 and 2011)that linked to one of your articles in 2010(that got you in the sphere?)then later in May 2014, Forney decided to dox SSM/Sunshine Mary(remember her at her own site as well as Dalrock and as well as one comment at the GBFM blog in August 2012-even before you came there to do two comments about that ”marry for money” ALTE(remember her too-even as ””black”german”?)-authored Traditional Christianity blog post that GBFM had been on for only one comment-had a little disagreement about as well in June 2013?),her husband(who Forney didn’t like her making it sound like he was a doctor-”he’ll be getting off from work at the hospital soon” instead of just a orderily at a hospital) more Shocking her 4-6(i don’t remember the exact amount as she has been gone for almost a decade) daughters(he actually showed pics of the girls schools},
that’s why i wouldn’t let any of the ”I must utterly destroy my enemies and prove I’m a hero to the cause of antifeminism!!” RP guys know anything very identifiable(but SSM did).
Anyway, the ”good guy” Forney, was mainly trying to show how the manosphere had idealized a non-ideal woman, and he was leaving the sphere ”permananetly” for a day or two over it(which he kept his promise to do😉-then he came back mainly with Roosh who he was besties with-BACK THEN, NOT now).
The sphere can be one of the most ridiculous things this side of the supposed Republicans® versus Democrats® WWF -type ”wars and arguments”, when most of them are ”besties” (they have quiet ”intimate”😉dinners together and their ”at war”with each other? -That make much sense?) and see the ”little people” (citizens) as their real enemies(but that gets done away with fast in the current Trump WILL drain the entire swamp-THIS TIME!!!” manosphere of political zealots.
I’m thankful for people who share my view and are so situated that they can be a public face of what I view as righteousness, sanity and plain old common sense.
I am just not free to be one of those people.
Neither am i , Elspeth!😉
that’s why i wouldn’t let any of the ”I must utterly destroy my enemies and prove I’m a hero to the cause of antifeminism!!” RP guys know anything very identifiable(but SSM did).
This is EXACTLY our position. I have never been induced to look anyone up and I certainly never thought a dude would be so inclined to do that kind of legwork for defamation purposes. A woman? Sure, but…
It made me be much more circumspect. As I’ve noted, enough people have seen me and mine that I don’t worry about anyone thinking that I’m not who I claim to be. I simply want to maintain my husband’s privacy as well as my own. He has been very supportive of my writing so long as it didn’t turn into something vulgar and catty. He deserved to be able to peaceably exist without me letting crazy folks into our lives for the sake of clicks.
And yes, I remember Alte. Traditional Christianity had several writers (as many as 10 or 12), both male and female. Hearth and I were among the five core founding writers (Alte founder and queen bee, me, Hearth, Texas Barbie, and The Practical Conservative). I don’t recall the GBFM kerfuffle but it has been, as you noted, a VERY long time now. I didn’t even saved any of my articles, some of which were quite good, lol.
I still keep in touch with most of those women to varying degree. Two I’ve seen in person the past 12 months through all our various travels.
Even my online identity gets redacted by the proprietor here. LOL And I’ve been threatened about not doxxing myself. You can’t make this sort of silly hypocrisy up. Although, I reckon, he feels compelled to do it by some rigid system of beliefs/behaviors specifically customized by him. His behavior seems marked by a spectrum of obsessions with rules, lists, and order, among other things.
I spy with my little eye, somebody who suffers from the following:
Preoccupation with details
Rigidity
Stubbornness
Excessive conscientiousness and pedantry (excessive concern with minor details and rules)
Splitting (binary all-or-nothing thinking)
He’s likely to reformat my comment for “readability”. LOL Yeah, that’s why, it couldn’t be due to any personal compulsion. /S
On a separate note, since the proprietor here has been able to diagnose me with a whole raft of conditions, presumably for my own benefit. I think it might be nice if he extended that gift and began diagnosing some of the rest of the folks here at his Manosphere-trolling asylum. I shouldn’t be the only one getting all the benefit from his keen diagnostic skills. Surely, he is skilled at that sort of thing considering the readiness with which he reflexively throws diagnosis my way for disagreeing with him. For you see, no rational person could disagree with his perfect set of beliefs.
But don’t worry, as recommended, I’m off to seek help for all my contrary observations. LOL
The dichotomous all-or-nothing thinking often leads to poor assessments of people, events, and things. What if voting were a tiny good, in principle. Well, that might not sit well with the binary thinker. Since he can’t argue that voting is a great moral imperative, his reflex would be to flip and say that it was utterly pointless or even a bad thing.
And what about Donald Trump? Well, if he is not all good, then he’s probably all bad, right? And anybody who likes some of the things he has done is a stupid Trump-worshipper, who has had the wool pulled over their eyes. What wool? Well, the wool that he is all good. Because obviously if they like him, or something he has done, then they must think he is all good, ‘cuz what other possibility is there? There’s only all good or all bad, right? Foolishness!
And so too with the Manosphere and anti-Feminists. Well, if those men are against the evils of Feminism and select evils of women, they must be entirely against women, right. If they advocate for a few things I don’t approve of, they must be entirely evil, right. If one man exaggerates, the whole movement must be entirely built on exaggeration, right. You really can’t react properly to the anti-Feminist movement if you aren’t able to see the good along with whatever bad you see.
If you always have to take a side and be either all for, or all against, everything, you’ll find yourself being against most everything except for your own self and your personal pet projects and groups which you then will have to stubbornly whitewash as a true believer.
How much better to go through life not having to make everything either all good or all bad.
——————————————————————
I didn’t follow all of the drawn out “Hypergamy” debate here, but it initially seemed like just more “all-or-nothing” binary thinking. If what the Manosphere describes as “hypergamy” has exceptions (and perhaps Derek’s wife and other good women are exceptions or repress and deny themselves their ungodly inclinations) then to him it isn’t an “all” thing, and if it isn’t an “all” thing he’ll reflexively declare it a “nothing”, a myth. And all the millions of men that are witnessing and having to deal with poorly restrained “hypergamy” must just be fools believing in a myth, because the phenomenon isn’t an absolute thing that always is an issue, so “all-or-nothing” then dictates that since it ain’t all, then it must be nothing.
And then from there pedantry and stubbornness kept the debate from getting anywhere nearly as quickly as it might have gotten with an open-minded person not so compulsively inclined to all-or-nothing thinking.
——————————————————————
I think Derek’s all-or-nothing mindset is part of what makes him so annoying to debate with. Since he compulsively wants absolutes and not to be in a middle ground position, he never wants to give an inch, because to give even a single inch is to leave the absolute position and he seemingly feels that if the one absolute isn’t right than he’s inclined to try to flip to the other absolute position. And if he already is fighting against and doesn’t want to go to that other absolute extreme, he will fight like a crazy man and stoop to almost any method to refuse to even acknowledge any genuine point made by his opponent.
In contrast my uncle, the retired Biblical languages professor, has the mindset that his field of Biblical interpretation is (excuse the pun) very much open to interpretation. Even when he is strongly in one corner on something, he is very willing to acknowledge other people’s points, and open mindedly weigh their evidence, and grant that even though he is a long-time expert that he could always be wrong, and that true science is never settled, and Etc. He doesn’t have to deny other people their points, because he is never afraid to be somewhere in the middle on a matter. He might make a comment to the effect of before I was 90% sure of this particular interpretation, but after considering your point, now I’m only 80% sure of my previous position. And there have been a couple of big points where I have presented him with other Biblical scholar’s work, and he admitted that he had changed his opinion on the matter to align with the evidence I presented. It was no skin off his nose to grant me points in a debate or even to change his long-held position in light of convincing evidence.
He went from being unsure of the legitimacy of the Pericope Adulterae but suspecting it was more than likely legitimate, to taking Daniel B. Wallace’s word for it that it was not in the original Gospels and writing to me that “it does seem to be spurious.”, after reading the following:
https://bible.org/article/my-favorite-passage-thats-not-bible
And again he was swayed to believe that there was hyperbole used by Jesus in Matthew 5:38–42 after reading the following paper:
https://etsjets.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/04/files_JETS-PDFs_61_61-1_JETS_61.1_83-103_Cruise_Corrected.pdf
He wrote to me: “As a rule I avoid hyperbole – preferring to assume that the words mean what they say, but this Matthew passage does seem to require that hyperbole came from the lips of Christ.”
How comparatively refreshing it is to debate with a brilliant man who doesn’t have dysfunctional binary all-or-nothing thinking but is willing to shift his position a bit whenever you present a good case for it.
I might clarify that I don’t think my uncle solely took Dan Wallace’s word for it. He did say: “Yes, I have great respect for Dan Wallace as a technician. He has replaced Bruce Metzger in my opinion.” I’m sure he also checked other sources, and I believe at one point he mentioned that he had a full digital replica of the Codex Bezae at his house.
About the pericope adulterae, like i said once at Spawnys after i watched the HISTORY
channel documentary in 1998/99 about how it wasn’t in the earliest copies of any of the gospels, and then a few preachers that i watched on AngelTV & even TBN also admitted it(i was barely on the net looking around and doing reaearch like i would do heavily by ’03- at that time)
After late ’03, i was coming across all kinds of interesting things in researching various topics in my (online) ever-expanding polymathic quest for knowledge, like the following :
https://kylerhughes.com/2012/11/21/in-laymans-terms-the-pericope-adulterae/
In Layman’s Terms: The Pericope Adulterae
Posted on November 21, 2012 by krhughes14
The term “pericope adulterae” may be unfamiliar to some, but it’s simply a traditional way of referring to the story of Jesus and the woman caught in adultery (John 7:53-8:11). This brief story (or “pericope”) has a unique and complex history shrouded in a fair amount of mystery – as far as biblical studies go, it’s a real puzzle. As almost every Bible translation notes before or after John 7:53-8:11, “our earliest and best manuscripts do not contain John 7:53-8:11.” Indeed, Codex Bezae (5th c.) is the first manuscript of John’s Gospel to contain this story, which the majority of copies of John’s Gospels have followed, to this day. To complicate matters, other, later manuscripts place the pericope after John 7:36, John 21:25, and Luke 21:38. The only comparable textual problem of this magnitude in the NT is the so-called “longer ending(s) of Mark” (16:9-20). So what do we make of this?
Almost all scholars agree that John 7:53-8:11 is not original to John’s Gospel: apart from the manuscript evidence, the story interrupts John’s narrative and features lots of non-Johannine language. Yet many scholars believe that the story does represent a (more or less) real event in the life of the historical Jesus. The story does exist in different forms prior to the fifth century. More than 20 years ago, Bart Ehrman’s article “Jesus and the Adulteress,” NTS 34 (1988): 24–44 argued that the form of the story that ended up in Codex Bezae was in fact a conflation of two earlier stories involving Jesus and a sinful woman. These earlier forms were likely in touch with an early tradition – but how much earlier? My article argues that the most important of these earlier forms can in fact be traced back to the first century, significantly increasing the odds that the majority of the pericope adulterae goes back to early oral tradition.
Why, though, was this story eventually placed after John 7:52? In a recent book (The Pericope Adulterae, the Gospel of John, and the Literacy of Jesus, NTTSD 38; Leiden: Brill, 2009), Chris Keith has argued that this story, perhaps the only one in the Jesus tradition that shows Jesus writing (on the ground), was included in the Gospels to counter the claims of critics who charged that Jesus was illiterate and therefore unworthy of honor or worship. The pericope’s subsequent dislocation to other places in the Gospels can reasonably be explained by the influence of the lectionary system in combination with the confusion resulting from the story’s late addition to the Gospel of John. It’s impossible to say, but it seems to me that Keith’s explanation is the best advanced thus far.
And again he was swayed to believe that there was hyperbole used by Jesus in Matthew 5:38–42 after reading the following paper:
BUT, Derek will counter you/ that with” JESUS was contrasting between what the law of MOSES demanded(which would be finished=completed in CHRIST’S own blood & death) & commanded & what the law of Love=CHRIST would now demand and command e.g.
38 “You have heard that it was said, ‘An eye for an eye, and a tooth for a tooth [punishment that fits the offense].’ 39 But I say to you, do not resist an evil person [who insults you or violates your rights]; but whoever [a]slaps you on the right cheek, turn the other toward him also [simply ignore insignificant insults or trivial losses and do not bother to retaliate—maintain your dignity, your self-respect, your poise]. 40 If anyone wants to sue you and take your shirt, [b]let him have your coat also [for the Lord repays the offender]. 41 And whoever [c]forces you to go one mile, go with him two. 42 Give to him who asks of you, and do not turn away from him who wants to borrow from you.
43 “You have heard that it was said, ‘You shall love your neighbor (fellow man) and hate your enemy.’ 44 But I say to you, [d]love [that is, unselfishly seek the best or higher good for] your enemies and pray for those who persecute you, 45 so that you may [show yourselves to] be the children of your Father who is in heaven; for He makes His sun rise on those who are evil and on those who are good, and makes the rain fall on the righteous [those who are morally upright] and the unrighteous [the unrepentant, those who oppose Him]. 46 For if you love [only] those who love you, what reward do you have? Do not even the tax collectors do that? 47 And if you greet only your brothers [wishing them God’s blessing and peace], what more [than others] are you doing? Do not even the Gentiles [who do not know the Lord] do that? 48 You, therefore, will be perfect [growing into spiritual maturity both in mind and character, actively integrating godly values into your daily life], as your heavenly Father is perfect.-Matthew 5:38-48-Amplified Bible (AMP)
Footnotes
Matthew 5:39 In this context the “slap” is not an act of violence, but more likely an insult or violation of one’s rights.
Matthew 5:40 Probably a prohibition against frivolous legal action.
Matthew 5:41 Roman soldiers were allowed to force civilian bystanders to carry their gear one mile for them.
Matthew 5:44 The key to understanding this and other statements about love is to know that this love (the Greek word agape) is not so much a matter of emotion as it is of doing things for the benefit of another person, that is, having an unselfish concern for another and a willingness to seek the best for another.
I’m a mainly in ”battle”, a defensive ”fighter”, but Derek is NOT.
i know you(as well, even between i, Derek, MOD & Jack had NEVER happened) wish that the bad blood between you, i, Derek, and MOD had NEVER happened- most likely with CAM, Liz and Elspeth also – but it did.
So do you want all of us regulars here to tell Derek to put you back in good standing as a commenter here or what?
I’d tell him to as of right now, brother(i know you have been hurting for years.)
I responded out of thread below, starting here.
Yes, I was on “The Price Is Right” and proud of it! I had so much fun!
In June I am going to have a bit on camera part in a NBC / Peacock TV show. I cant say at the moment. I’ll let you know when it happens! Its a pretty popular show. I’m in line behind the star at a Starbucks and he’s stalling the line, and chime in “hey, some people gotta go to work!”
I do have an “agent” now for DJ gigs and smaller bit roles here in LA. That is what got me this part. Its so “cliche” in this city…..everyone has an “agent” or is “selling a script” or “working on a screenplay”
I did do a screentest at NBC earlier this year! Exposure and a little extra cash in pocket!
The perks of living in LA.
I only met two “famous” people as a kid. David Prowse (Darth Vader) and a woman who worked with my dad and had a few bit parts in the TV show Miami Vice. It’s hard to overstate how cool South Florida was in the mid-80s.
My Uncle lived in Pompano Beach in the 1980’s so we would visit in the spring . We spent one Christmas there in 1983. We would go to Miami, Ft Lauderdale (I recall going with family to the ‘Phillips 66’ tower in Ft Lauderdale and it has a rotating restaurant on the top). We would swim at Deerfield Beach and I remember when the big mall opened in Boca Raton, high end for that time.
The last time I was in Miami was in 2000. My one cousin was getting married to a Cuban-American. Really cool guy. They are still married btw…..they live in Miami Lakes
Snorkeling is what I miss the most – what you can’t do up here. Lots of shallow reefs off the South Florida coast.
We always went to the mall in West Palm Beach.
I’ve never been on TV personally (unless you count that time you can see me running from a waterspout on a news broadcast), but I’ve been interviewed by researchers and members of the media on a number of occasions. Always for print and online formats, never for video. I once had one of my photos on a TV show, or at least I presume so. They paid me for it, whether or not they used it. I never actually checked. Can’t complain about the extra cash, what little I’ve made on my photography (and it isn’t much).
My favorite was when my photos were used for the cover and cover article for HerbalGram in Spring 2014 (here). It was loaded with photos and looked stunning. The online version doesn’t do it justice.
Yes, I was on “The Price Is Right” and proud of it! I had so much fun!
i had just as much fun seeing you play that day!
i think it aired on Tuesday, December 27th, 2021, at 11 AM (my time, which was the first i left spawnys too because redacted above couldn’t handle i being there after i had left his site permanently three and a half weeks earlier), and i digitally recorded it.
i had NEVER liked guys like that anon commenter at Dalrock (and once at Boxer’s ) messing with MOD and so to i, His being on “The Price Is Right” was sort of like ”a MGTOWosphere kid done good”story come to life.
This is why redacted’s
And what about Donald Trump? Well, if he is not all good, then he’s probably all bad, right? And anybody who likes some of the things he has done is a stupid Trump-worshipper, who has had the wool pulled over their eyes. What wool? Well, the wool that he is all good. Because obviously if they like him, or something he has done, then they must think he is all good, ‘cuz what other possibility is there? There’s only all good or all bad, right? Foolishness!
And so too with the Manosphere and anti-Feminists. Well, if those men are against the evils of Feminism and select evils of women, they must be entirely against women, right. If they advocate for a few things I don’t approve of, they must be entirely evil, right. If one man exaggerates, the whole movement must be entirely built on exaggeration, right. You really can’t react properly to the anti-Feminist movement if you aren’t able to see the good along with whatever bad you see.
If you always have to take a side and be either all for, or all against, everything, you’ll find yourself being against most everything except for your own self and your personal pet projects and groups which you then will have to stubbornly whitewash as a true believer.
How much better to go through life not having to make everything either all good or all bad.
It is very puzzling, as i have clearly stated
”i like Trump, but he was much much better when he was calling himself MR.MCMAHON & fighting bald S.O.B. Texans in the 90s/early 2000’s.”
It’s the same thing with the manosphere
It was much, much better when it actually brought up about changing Duluth laws,speaking out against Newborn Male Circumcision(why is this allowed to go on when its called mutilation if its girl that gets her skin parts removed?
-cuz miserably divorced and unhappily married MEN decided to focus on their own ”wants”,desires, and pet projects while NOT looking out for the tiniest of male(who i long ago said ”better{(see the qualifier?) represent=image God in his caringness, love and protection than women do but someone was so ”all or nothing”they didn’t ”get” the qualifier BUT thought i meant women didn’t represent God at all-which is what they wanted to hear NOT what i wrote }children that are loved by God as any MAN or woman or girl!
That leaked signal chat….with Hesgeth leading is on the news. I listened to it. He was lit (had a few drinks obviously before / during). Im a former drunk. I know this.
Two marriages and a gazillion affairs during and in between them. I was on a Dischord chat and I was telling his fervent supporters “If this guy was a Democrat or appointed by a Democrat run admin you all would be screaming about morality, trust, and being capable to run this important dept and how he has to be removed now!”
He has zero business in this position. He also is now playing the cards about auditing The Pentagon. He was all for it before nomination, but now…….well, you see “sensitive info” and “top secret” and “not staying competitive with other nations in military development” letting out infor that could “weaken” us but that Signal chat…….plenty of sensitive info there right out in public. A fraud, an alcoholic and a man who is WAY over his head
A department that has failed every audit going back to the Carter Administration and still evidently “doesnt have enough money”
Think you might be right about Hegseth, Jason.
Though I didn’t actually hear it, Mike cannot understand why the Secretary of Defense would provide such specific (and unnecessary) details in this type of forum, which would otherwise have been pretty mundane. Mike would never have made that mistake (to say the least).
Inebriation would explain a lot.
In the future, I hope they will require some double authentication method. As it is doubtful that Mr. Goldberg has a CAC, requiring a CAC login isn’t a burdensome verification method.
I’m sure Trump is disappointed after all the work it took to get Hegeseth confirmed, this just feeds the opposition.
Yes, of course what Hillary did was 100000+ percent worse. She used an unsecure personal server to conduct state department business for years…and then bleach bit everything after subpoena. And yes, the liberals by and large all said it was just fine with them.
That doesn’t mean everyone else in positions of public trust can play loose with security information into perpetuity. I know very well what happens to military people who are lax with security. Captain Crozier comes to mind.
Honestly I know about 20 people who are or were in military positions who would be honest to a fault in this position, and keep their egos in check, and would perform brilliantly. I don’t know why selecting people for sec of defense is so difficult.
He’s in over his head.
He has no business running a dept like this. This does not make me a “Trump hater” or having TDS. I watched him speak, saw him on Fox News over the years…and when he was pegged to be the Sec of Defense I was just “Probably not the best choice”
Im not “defending” the previous admin work either in this dept.
He reminds me of Stephen Crowder, the loudest guy in the room. Quick witted snippy answers, all the solutions…..and very partisan.
We need a skilled administrator in that dept. Not a “guys guy” or someone who *may* have issues with alcohol. Even his mother made a comment years ago about his “excessive drinking and womanizing”
I dont know *who* the person running that dept should be.
Trump’s biggest mistakes from his first term was not “firing” people in the Cabinet who were backstabbing him, selling him short and not as qualified as they could be. Even Supreme Court Justice….Kavenaugh has voted against many issues that have come before the Court that Trump wanted passed. No one seems to remember that Kavenaugh was “conservative, moral, upstanding and follows-the-constitution”
Yeah…..okay
Trump is doing the thing he has to do…defend him. I get it. The Admin isnt even six months old yet.
But Trump is not a fool this time around….if this or something like this happened say a year into his Administration? Two years? He would fire him. No doubt in my mind.
“I know very well what happens to military people who are lax with security. ”
Sometimes. The main program I worked for my last decade at LM was an unacknowledged SAP until some AF Colonel flapped his yapper and lo and behold it has a wikipedia entry. Only the AF’s number one weapon system acquisition priority. Pretty sure that Colonel isn’t in jail and still has a clearance.
Good Lord. Was he active duty? If he’s retired, that wouldn’t surprise me.
Active they typically hang em high. I knew someone who was taken away in handcuffs in front of his family. They actually raided his home, for something that was no longer even classified and hadn’t been for over 30 years. They did eventually let him go (since no crime had been committed).
For background context:
They discovered his “OPSEC violation” during a lie detector test. They asked him some questions and he admitted to something innocuous (since it had long since been unclassified).
Yes, he was active duty. He blabbed to the press and suddenly the program existed.
I don’t know how anyone could get in trouble for something that has been declassifed. If it’s passed the declassification date, the originating authority has to look at it. It doesn’t automatically become declassified and a derivative classifier can’t just decide it’s now unclassified. It’s possible he got in trouble for this.
They can polygraph you but I don’t know many people who had to do this.
Wow, that’s crazy (about the Colonel), Cameron.
Think all of the initial cadre F22 pilots had to sit through a polygraph.
It was extremely unsettling, I’m told.
Also, I’m meeting one of the commenters (former ones, he may still comment now and then now….but much more frequently a few years back) from Jack’s space for dinner tomorrow night. He’s in the LA area, he hit me up to meet.
Should be fun, he too will understand that I am not the “anti-christ” nor “bitter” and a “blue pilled cuck who puts women on a pedestal”
The writers and big shots over there are the ones who cant stop talking about women 😉
I wish I could have dinner with you and a certain other blogger who lives in California. My offer to have you for dinner with the family stands if you ever make it to the Philadelphia area remains.
I leave the invite open to posters and the like who find themselves in LA….welcome to meet up.
Looking to go back to the Adirondack Mts of New York State one-more-time in 2026 for another hike and camping adventure. I think this will be my last trek there to hike and camp. I camped and hiked with my dad back in the 1980’s…….and vivid memories from the later 1970’s as a boy camping in this area of the State Park (Pharoah Mountain Wilderness Area)
The first time I met up with someone in meatspace that I had only previously known online was…. camping. My wife and I literally met another couple at the campsight with no one else around. No public restaurant. Nope. It was out in the middle of nowhere thousands of miles from our home state. At least we were pretty confident neither of us had a fake online persona, but it still felt a bit surreal.
Multiple times in China we’ve met up with people we did not know, got in their cars, went to their home or a side-street restaurant, ate meals with them. Without our official interpreter/guide. In one case, we didn’t even share even a rudimentary common language with the family.
I have never been induced to look anyone up and I certainly never thought a dude would be so inclined to do that kind of legwork for defamation purposes. A woman? Sure, but…
Elspeth was right: there were 2)two women involved in that Matt Forney doxxing Sunshine Mary/SSM stuff from April-May 2014. i wasn’t thinking about/seeing it from that angle because i was looking at it from MAN’S POV.
But here’s where Sunshine Mary/SSM herself says:
However, there is one thing I have always wanted to address: in Laura/lgrobins’s many subtle (and overt) attempts at “doxxing” me (though I was already fully out since starting my new blog last April) in various comment threads over the past six months, she has repeatedly claimed that she was banned from my site for disagreeing with me. Obviously this is untrue; a number of people saw her final few comments on my site and were shocked by what she wrote. She wasn’t disagreeing, she was ranting at me and calling me a bitch for no reason except that she was angry because I had deleted a conversation between Will S., Julian O’Dea, and Chris. The conversation I deleted occurred in the middle of the night when I was sleeping; Julian O’Dea and Lena S. had apparently had some kind of terrible fight (are you noticing any themes about Lena S/CL’s interactions with other people?), and Julian, Chris, and Will S were gossiping about it. I saw no reason to allow gossip about Lena on my site; she and I aren’t friends, but I didn’t wish her ill nor want my site used to bad-mouth her, so I simply deleted the conversation. Laura Grace went absolutely ballistic, calling me a Queen Bee for daring to delete off-topic gossip from my own site! She called me a bitch, and then I apologized to her for having offended her, deleted her comment, and banned her. My husband had wanted her banned from a few days earlier when he had left a rare comment on my site and she had taken the opportunity to lecture him about how he ought to be more involved in my blog (you can read her comment here) and that we should be more like 7Man and CL (who is really Lena/ThagJones/etc); he asked me, “Who is this crazy lady trying to tell me what to do? Get rid of her.”
Also, I have gotten a suggestion that I return the favor and stage a public doxxing of Lena S (CL/ThagJone/ContentWoman/ChaoticMuse, or whatever handle she’s using now), since I have her personal information and could do to her exactly what she used Matt Forney to do to me. The temptation to do this is strong, especially since her life details are far worse than mine, but I believe this is a sinful temptation. I do not believe giving in to that temptation would be morally right nor would I be blessed by God if I did so. The temptation to lay her life out is wrong and I ask readers to pray for me to submit myself fully unto God. It’s really a struggle and I confess that struggle before you; keep me accountable please. I have gotten a number of emails from fellow Christians exhorting me to stop talking, not to defend myself, and to let Lena, Laura, and Matt say what they are going to say. I know this is right, but if you are a Christian, I am asking you to pray these verses over me please:
Blessed are you when people insult you, persecute you and falsely say all kinds of evil against you because of me. (Matthew 5:11)
Also, if you catch me trying to act like a victim and giving myself a pity party, I ask you to remind me of Isaiah 53:7 as an example of what true suffering of insults looks like:
He was oppressed and afflicted, yet he did not open his mouth; he was led like a lamb to the slaughter, and as a sheep before its shearers is silent, so he did not open his mouth.
I am being gossiped about and libeled on the internet, not falsely accused as I’m being led to the cross of death, and I’m far from perfect and sinless and undoubtedly deserve some correction, but Christ truly was an innocent man who was silent in the face of lies. I have no cause to act like a poor-me victim when the Son of God suffered this kind of slander and torment for my (and your) sake. Call me on it if you see me doing it, please.
So, this is my final direct “refutation” post; at this point you’ll have to decide for yourself how trustworthy you find the comments of Matt, Lena, Laura, and myself when you are evaluating anything they say about me.
I’ll have one more in which I make a few general observations about how people behave in groups and why men (like Matt) might be motivated to insinuate themselves into a disagreement between several women and try to whip up an entire community (like the manosphere) into a state of emotional hysteria. I think there are some lessons here that would be beneficial for all of us to ponder.
Commenter,
The dichotomous all-or-nothing thinking often leads to poor assessments of people, events, and things. What if voting were a tiny good, in principle. Well, that might not sit well with the binary thinker.
The problem isn’t with my way of thinking, it is that you don’t know what you are talking about.
Let’s presume that I’m not engaging in all-or-nothing thinking. Do you think you can do that, or is it all-or-nothing with you?
Voting is, by definition, a binary choice, and so any decision on voting must also be binary. But the reasoning that goes into the voting decision need not be binary simply because the decision to be made is binary. You have failed to distinguish between a binary choice and the non-binary reasoning behind that choice. In fact, this illustrates your own all-or-nothing thinking, because you’ve collapsed my options into “all-or-nothing” or “not all-or-nothing.” But I reject this binary way of thinking.
Now, let’s consider a “tiny good.” Say I took the wildly optimistic view that voting for a particular candidate was 60% bad and 40% good, unambiguously not a binary evaluation. Then, the rational choice would be to choose from among the two binary options the choice “do not vote for him.” If I run this calculus on all candidates and conclude “not a single one will provide net-benefit, but all will be a net-harm” then I’m forced into another binary choice: “do not vote for anyone” and “engage in moral utlitarianism.” I’m not a utilitarian. It’s a decidedly non-Christian philosophy. So the real choice is this “do not vote for anyone” or “embrace a non-Christian moral philosophy.” The choice is, IMO, obvious. Indeed, I wouldn’t even say there is a choice.
This leads me to what you might call black-and-white thinking: concluding that there is only one logical outcome with respect to voting that is consistent with Christianity. But that’s not black-and-white thinking, it’s just logical consistency. It’s taking the accepted premises of a sound argument and treating the conclusion as if it were true. It is reason. What you call “black-and-white thinking” is just the application of the laws of logic.
The reality is that there is nothing wrong with my so-called “black-and-white” thinking (where true is true and false is false in a logical argument). You have a problem with the complex, non-binary calculus that led me to evaluate all the political candidates as being net-harmful. In other words, what you really don’t like is that I don’t agree with you.
That’s binary thinking: “either you are with me or you are against me.”
Let’s demonstrate this further:
And so too with the Manosphere and anti-Feminists. Well, if those men are against the evils of Feminism and select evils of women, they must be entirely against women, right.
No.
If they advocate for a few things I don’t approve of, they must be entirely evil, right.
No.
If one man exaggerates, the whole movement must be entirely built on exaggeration, right.
No.
If you always have to take a side and be either all for, or all against, everything
I don’t.
I think Derek’s all-or-nothing mindset…
The error is yours, not mine.
Since he compulsively wants absolutes and not to be in a middle ground position
False. Objectively and easily demonstrably false.
And if he already is fighting against and doesn’t want to go to that other absolute extreme, he will fight like a crazy man and stoop to almost any method to refuse to even acknowledge any genuine point made by his opponent.
This is proof that you don’t understand at all. Does believing this falsehood make it easier for you to dismiss my ideas?
The reality is that you don’t make genuine points. You rarely even understand what you are talking about. For example:
You make elementary mistakes, but believe it to be others who are doing it and not you.
I have no problem with acknowledging when other people make genuine points. If you read the comments and posts here and elsewhere, you’d see that I regularly acknowledge the genuine points of many, many others. The fact that you do not know this only proves how little you care about what I actually believe. You prefer paranoid delusion to objective reality.
But not so with you. I don’t acknowledge your genuine points, because you almost never make any good points. More often than not, you are simply incorrect (as illustrated in this comment above). You are often irrational. Often you either unwilling or unable to engage with my refutations. You make irrelevant retorts. More than anyone else, you engage in ad hominem and so your words are frequently dismissed outright.
But, most relevant to this discussion, when I carefully and methodically correct your errors, you attack me for being obsessed with precision and detail. I believe you call this focus on truth a “preoccupation with details.” See, it is you, not me, who has problem acknowledging genuine points. Remember when you made that mistake with the interlinear? Despite me pointing it out over and over again, it took you months just to partially admit your error. You have still not acknowledged this recent error (as further supported here and here) or your most egregious error yet here. And just to prove this isn’t about me, neither can you admit that you misrepresented someone who isn’t me.
One great irony is that the times that I have acknowledged your genuine points, you either already abandoned the field of debate and so missed the acknowledgment, or you simply didn’t comprehend that I was doing so.
For example, once when I was talking about epistemologically equivalent positions, I was explicitly rejecting black-and-white thinking. But you didn’t understand the point I was making because it would have weakened your argument to do so. You wouldn’t accept my “middle ground position” because you would have been forced to conclude that I was not, in fact, a feminist goddess worshiper, but merely someone who isn’t a black-and-white thinker like you are.
The thing is, you still have a choice. You can still recant the dozens of times you’ve falsely concluded that I’m a feminist goddess worshiper because you have this false black-and-white belief that anyone who disagrees with you on your Genesis “image of God” interpretation must be a feminist (even though your conclusion doesn’t logically follow). You can apologize here, on Sigma Frame, Spawny’s Space, and who knows how many other places that you were wrong about me because you had viewed the whole situation in a strict black-and-white fashion without allowing for the nuance of my position. You can ask that those libelous comments be removed.
But you can’t or won’t because all those things you think apply to me are actually projections of things that apply to you.
——————————————————————
He went from being unsure of the legitimacy of the Pericope Adulterae but suspecting it was more than likely legitimate, to taking Daniel B. Wallace’s word for it that it was not in the original Gospels and writing to me that “it does seem to be spurious.”, after reading the following.
And again he was swayed to believe that there was hyperbole used by Jesus in Matthew 5:38–42 after reading the following paper.
He wrote to me: “As a rule I avoid hyperbole – preferring to assume that the words mean what they say, but this Matthew passage does seem to require that hyperbole came from the lips of Christ.”
How comparatively refreshing it is to debate with a brilliant man who doesn’t have dysfunctional binary all-or-nothing thinking but is willing to shift his position a bit whenever you present a good case for it.
What a ridiculous thing to say! As you should know, I have long believed that it is not authentic. Don’t you remember the last time we talked about this? This blog has a search function. If you were concerned with truth and fairly representing my views, you would have used it. Here is my comment from an article more than a year ago, where I said this…
Back when I wrote “Patriarchal Forgery?,” I noted that 1 Corinthians 14:34-35 is, like the Pericope Adulterae, probably an unauthentic forgery: likely inserted after the original text had been written.
And you responded here:
I notice, according to pattern, that you have made multiple posts against a passage of scripture that you claim might be spurious, despite it appearing (as you’ve noted) in all the earliest surviving New Testament manuscripts, because it just so happens to conflict with your Feminist religion.
Yet when there is a lengthier passage like the “Pericope Adulterae” which does not appear in any of the earliest surviving manuscripts, you must refer folks to Wikipedia, because you’ve not made any posts to try to make people aware of that apocryphal passage which promotes satanic lawlessness and sets up a constant opposition to hinder all well-meaning “sinners” from ever enforcing God’s commands, even within the church.
This is a logically fallacious objection, a form of the tu quoque fallacy, which is itself a type of ad hominem. It wasn’t enough for you that I said the Pericope Adulterae was probably false. You demanded that I do more, and because I didn’t meet your personal requirements for prioritization and indoctrination, I must therefore be a feminist. So not only did you use a logical fallacy, but this is also an invalid argument which doesn’t logically follow.
If you wonder why I am so harsh on you and not others, it is because of your stubborn refusal to accept objective corrections. There is, after all, no question that your comment was both logically fallacious and a logically invalid argument. No amount of trying to “find the middle ground” can save a logically invalid argument which is further based on a logical fallacy.
I can keep posting links to your old arguments pointing out your errors that you’ve never resolved. I have dozens of comments to choose from where you’ve made errors and they have gone both unacknowledged and unresolved.
All you can do is repeat the same arguments that I have already responded to. Your citation of the that paper by Charles Cruise is a prime example. I disagree with the assessment that you and your uncle concluded. I have written about that at length here and you have never responded to my objections. All you’ve done is repeat your original claim while deleting the pingbacks on your site that pointed to my responses. You made your claim, I responded, and instead of responding to my counterclaim, you just went back to asserting your original claim while insulting me with your imaginary view. Either stop acting like a coward and respond to my claims, or cease spouting your silly ad hominem personal attacks.
Here is an example of us arguing past each other.
I wrote: How comparatively refreshing it is to debate with a brilliant man who doesn’t have dysfunctional binary all-or-nothing thinking but is willing to shift his position a bit whenever you present a good case for it.
You responded: What a ridiculous thing to say! As you should know, I have long believed that it is not authentic.
I never in that comment remarked on what you thought about the Pericope Adulterae. I was just giving an example of my uncle shifting his position, and acknowledging it, and that it was refreshing to deal with somebody who wasn’t too ideologically stubborn that they couldn’t admit they shifted their viewpoint a bit in reaction to their opposition’s argument.
Again, you’re arguing with your own strawman whom you have affixed my identity to.
You also don’t seem to get that I don’t have the time to read all the foolishness you write about me, nor do I follow hardly any of the links in posts or comments about me. Just because I sometimes come here and click on the pages certainly doesn’t mean I have the time to read everything or would care to. I used to just use the (Control-F) “find” function and put part of my screen name in to see what twaddle y’all were saying about me. One of your commenters often used various permutations of my screen name, but I was usually able to find them by inputting the 3rd through 6th letters into the “find” function. However, by banning my screen name and referring to me by a whole plethora of other new terms it has just made it more likely that I won’t even see your comments about me, so it is foolish for you to read anything into my failure to respond to your seemingly endless swipes at me and what I have written.
Anywhoo! I’m obviously just upsetting you, by trying to get you to quit spouting your lies about me. And after I point out a few personality observations you respond with: Sperrrrrrrrg! My thinking is not binary, except for when it is. You clearly don’t understand all my million little seemingly paradoxical mental rules that I operate by. So, here’s a list of accusations.
I can’t see how that doesn’t also fit exactly with what I already pointed out. LOL
I’ve gone over my beef with you too many times already. So, I don’t care to rehash it even clearer. (as if that were possible, or that you somehow missed it the twenty times I’ve explained it already) I’ve wasted far too much time responding to your foolishness already, to no avail. I leave you and your Manosphere-trolling asylum to nip at my heels in my absence.
OT: Met up with a commenter from Jacks space yesterday…..he doesnt post much now, I believe he still lurks here and there. He may give a comment here and there on the site.
We had a decent meal out in Pasadena. A good chat. A good visit. He’s young! I’m old enough to be his dad (perspective, I was about 26 when he was born 🙂 ) ! Handsome, intelligent and good guy!
I told him if he is down in LA again, to please drop a note or call.
We talked about the forums. Kept it polite. Had a chuckle and laugh here and there. Really great to put a name to a face 🙂
That’s awesome! 🤗
And for the record….he did not view me as “the anti-christ” nor “deluded and blinded by Blue Pill thinking” nor “putting women on a pedestal”
I do hope to meet with him again someday!
We didnt go specifics, but we did speak much about “tone / inflection” is very difficult to convey in a text based forum, especially when it can be charged with very strong opinions.
I liked how he as a younger man did say he liked some perspectives from Jack, and others that “helped” him, and he did like how I would just at times take a contrarian position just to see how they handled themselves / put some of their stances with some legitimate questions.
We both brought up Scott, and I encouraged him to reach out to him and meet him (if he was up for that). I still like how Scott when discussing “trajectories” he calmly explained he “didnt have the answer” to help many men who were way off…especially men who were into their 30’s (paraphrasing) “There comes a point when going to the gym and learning ‘Game’ probably isnt going to help many of these men at a certain point. It breaks my heart to say this”
I admired his honesty the most in that. It wasnt easy to say, but said in the best way that COULD be said.
It was just a good time for me. I dont meet many like-minded people (socially / politically speaking overall) here in California.
Well that’s great! I’m glad it worked out so well.
We both brought up Scott, and I encouraged him to reach out to him and meet him (if he was up for that). I still like how Scott when discussing “trajectories” he calmly explained he “didnt have the answer” to help many men who were way off…especially men who were into their 30’s (paraphrasing) “There comes a point when going to the gym and learning ‘Game’ probably isnt going to help many of these men at a certain point. It breaks my heart to say this”
I admired his honesty the most in that. It wasnt easy to say, but said in the best way that COULD be said.
Scott essentially knew that with information (gained from life itself or otherwise) one could either do it or NOT.
Its NOT that different from the hard-as-heck videogames from the time before Donkey Kong Country in ’94 and the PS1 in ’95-when both Nintendo and Sony encouraged developers to make ALL games easy as possible instead of difficult to beat to mainly avoid renting them(which was illegal in Japan(& wanted by Nintendo in America to be the law too) in the 1980s and 90s to make sure games were actually bought)
THIS article explains some of the above:
https://sorasenbei.wordpress.com/2015/05/20/video-rental-culture-in-japan/
May
20
2015
Video rental culture in Japan
CFTRnHhUsAEIBZ-Remember the nostalgia of heading to Blockbuster or a rental store with your friends and looking for that new game or movie release? How you could fight over the one movie you oh so wanted? Well it’s a culture that’s still alive and kicking in Japan. And this week I rented my very first blu-ray, how many people can say that in this digital age of download? Well, millions in fact!
Netflix, Hulu, and other streaming services, have completely displaced media rental culture in first world countries and many others, so why does a first world country like Japan still thrive on with rentals? And why did I have to wait almost 15 minutes to return a video in downtown Nagoya? Well here’s a little back story. Downloading and streaming movies online, have a bit of a stigma in Japan. People in Japan trust their big corporations and businesses and are even thankful for their practices. They believe it’s the life stream of a capitalist economy that can keep people’s lives comfortable. The distrust here against the big and rich is small compared to countries overseas. Therefore, corporations and politicians vouching for the big businesses and even their strange and backwards rules and regulations that they want to enforce is quite common here. A law was passed recently to make download or upload of copyrighted material illegal with heavy fines and jail time as punishment.
The movie industry in Japan has done a lot to scare people away from downloading films with loud campaigns that can be seen on TV or at the movie theaters. It’s so loud that even legal downloading on the Playstation Network, XBOX Live, and iTunes has been lagging behind other countries. Strangely enough, they place blank cds and dvds in front of the rental checkout counter to passively encourage you to make copies of your rental for backup or re-watching. Making copies has been an ingrained culture in Japan, since their invention of the VCR. Japan gave us the VCR, to record and copy, and at one time frightened Hollywood, that it would cut into their profits, which actually has done the opposite and help it grow into what it is today.
The same does not apply for video games though. Video games are protected in another way. In the US and Canada, lending your friend a video game is something common. You own the commodity you purchased, you’re free to do with it as you please. But in Japan, it’s technically against the law to lend video games to a friend. You can resell them, but not lend them. The same applies in stores. You can buy video games but you can not rent them. Some places have received the rights to rent out games from certain publishers, but even so they’re very small in numbers. People still go to the arcade and buy used games, but almost never rent.
So, as you can see renting culture for movies, and just movies is strong. Would it be strong for games if they were on the list? I believe they would be, I mean who wouldn’t want to try a game before buying it. Downloading a demo would be nice, considering Japan has one of the fastest internet speeds in the world. But people still turn to rent videos, and buying video games. The best part about renting in Japan is that it is fairly cheap with coupons. I got my blu-ray version of Interstellar for 216 yen. Which is just about $2.
The process of filling out an application for was easy and quick as well. Returning the video, isn’t as simple as it was overseas. You have to hand it to them and they have to scan to see if it is late. If it is late you have to pay on the spot. No dash and dine. It’s funny what small changes in laws can do to a country, and it also explains the digital divide between Japan and the West.
i NEVER needed strategy guides on video games or women mainly because i approach them like i do most things, e.g. ”they are a world unto themselves and don’t go by my rules”.