[Jackreacher]

Tradition is on it's way out, completely out. It might take a decade or more but something new is on it's way. This is the shuffle before things settle into the new way of things, to make way for perhaps the only sensible way of living. Everyone's scrambling to get their's currently while not really being satisfied with the current arrangement at large. There are women that want out along with men. This period will be where the so called hamster dies. What lies after is the end of silliness. First we had to shift from collective societies, collective thinking to individualistic self centered societies. Right now you can see that culture itself has fragmented into an unrecognizable mass of different subcultures, there is very little group cohesion overall in the vast majority of groups. Culture is in decline and will remain so until it ceases to pervade human existence, it will be cast off like an antiquated human behavior of a bygone era. The times we live in may very well be identified in future history books as the beginning of the end for culture.

[The Lizard of Oz]

The real failing of character and of masculinity consists, above all, in succumbing to a state of panicked fear of the future, which leads a man to close his eyes and cower before the rich and varied realities of the present, while longing futilely for a glorified past that has never existed. That is what I see in scorpion's post earlier in the thread.

First, I don't know what world it is in which nebulous "players" live in a state of supposed sexual utopia (or dystopia, according to scorpion), gaming "tons" of nameless and faceless "sluts" and blithely "chasing orgasms" -- but it's definitely not anything resembling the world we actually live in.

As anyone who has paid the least attention to this forum can see, the pursuit of erotic success even by those few men who devote serious time and resources to it (always a tiny minority of men -- this can never be forgotten) -- is a fraught and demanding endeavor whose results are uncertain at best. Even the most accomplished players on this board fail far more often than they succeed, and even their successes are often fleeting.

Now as before, there exist a small number of "naturals" who effortlessly attract women and for whom the game is an easy one; in some contexts they have more opportunities now than they might have had at other times or societies, and in some far less (look at the extreme disregard in which "age inappropriate relationships" are held now, and how much more difficult and even dangerous it is for a would-be 40 year old cad to bag some 18 year old cutiepie, something that would have hardly raised an eyebrow 50 years ago).

Look at the amount of horror, outrage and hand-wringing that has been the reaction to a simple hapless hot-panted 18 year old slut like Belle Knox throwing her slightly crazed eyes, lean teenage body, and invitingly meaty ass into the pornographic fray. Hardly the reaction of men who live the mythical life of debauched sexual satiety.

Equally deluded is an idea of the past in which men lived in an unspecified abstract state of "traditional masculinity" and women were obedient wives and mothers. That past has never existed -- not even the most draconian repression of extreme Islamic societies like Saudi Arabia has been able to achieve anything remotely like it. The reason for this is simple: the basic nature of women, and of men's relation to them, has never changed.

The truth is that men have always been fools and white-knights when it comes to women; and women have always been whores and sluts if they could get away with it, which was usually not too hard. There have always and in every society been endless infidelities, births outside of wedlock and from fathers other than the husband; the thing that has perhaps characterized some periods in the past is a certain discretion that enabled the upper classes to helpfully sweep such things under the rug. But that does not mean that they did not go on at all times.

Women in their sexual prime (and often well past it) have always been amoral and sexually rapacious creatures whose nature was completely misunderstood by the great majority of men. The main problem with feminism is not that it has changed the nature of women -- it has not; you might as well tell the tiger to change his stripes. The problem is that it has given men a new and different way to be deluded about what women are, in addition to all the old ways which remain fully in effect.

Further, the men on this forum who long to have lived in a period such as the 1950s do not even understand their own nature and personality. That was a much harder time that required discipline, action, and the willingness to grit your teeth and get with the program. The truth is that most guys who post here, myself included, are talkers -- we like to talk at length and at leisure and it easy to lose sight of the simple fact that this is a luxury and one which most periods do not allow, or only allow a very few lucky men.

I think that most of us if we did live in the 1950s would not in fact have the dreaded requisite white picket fence and "Leave it to Beaver" wife and children; instead we would mostly be city dwellers, beatniks, and street philosopher types who would sit at the end of the bar whining about the "stifling conformity" all around us -- whining in much the same tone and way as we do about the current period, but with a different kind of edge in our voices because in a harder age, the consequences of not taking care of your shit are quite a bit more serious. That is how it would be. White picket fence types, for better or worse, usually do not post on internet forums to whine about the iniquities of whatever time period they happen to live in.

scorpion concludes his post with the mention of the usual dreadful bugaboo of those "quiet and lonely moments" in which the mythical player is supposed to awaken from his utopian/dystopian sexual stupor and realize the only thing there apparently ever is to realize, namely "the thought of how meaningless it all is".

This portent of "meaninglessness" and the implied promise of "meaning" is every idelogue's stock-in-trade, right or left. And it involves a terrible irony -- because it is the ideologue himself who, while promising to deliver some unspecified meaning and holding out this promise as a check to be cashed, actually takes away from the interest, variety, and richness that could make life meaningful. There is a dreadful deadness and vacuity in the way words like "orgasm", "sluts" or "fuck" are thrown around in that post; they are uttered without the least interest or relish, because the only thing that animates the ideologue is his ideology.

It is easy to be seduced by the ideologue's thin and single-minded fervor, and not realize that in his text, life itself has already been betrayed and evacuated; and further, that he cannot cash the check he has written.

The greatest manly virtue of all is courage -- the courage to live your life fully, without that fear of the future that causes a man to lose the world in seeking the false comfort of this or that ideology. It is a man who has lost the world in this way who is in real danger of believing in the childish idea of "meaninglessness" in those "quiet and lonely moments"; and it matters not if that man has been lucky enough to fuck some dozens of delicious wenches or has contented himself with only one "traditional" harridan. "Meaning" is not something that can be delivered by thin ideas like "traditional masculinity" or (on the other end of the spectrum) "saving the environment", or whatever other vacuous slogans we are accosted by. Life can be found meaningful if it is lived by a man who is willing to think and feel, and to be humble and patient in the face of the endless interest and variety of reality.

[cardguy]

(03-26-2014 04:31 PM)Mujeriego Wrote:  

I'm going to decline a trip on the time machine. The "Leave It to Beaver" life is about as close to hell as I can imagine.

I agree 100% with this.

[scorpion]

That was the most painfully overwritten and rambling attempt at a rebuttal I've ever seen on the forum. I'm not even sure what the point behind that post was, Lizard. Did it really require that many words to call me an ideologue who cowers before the future? And do you feel better after getting that off your chest? I especially liked the part where you couldn't resist talking about Belle Knox's "lean teenage body" and "invitingly meaty ass". You're clearly the type of sex-obsessed guy I was talking about, so it's no wonder that post struck a nerve with you. But really, I'm not sure why you're so threatened by the idea that a more traditional society would be a much better place for men (and women, and children) to live. Unless you're some kind of degenerate sex pervert it should be fairly obvious that sexual pleasure is not the most important thing in life. Even on a forum devoted to game most guys understand that intuitively.

I honestly find your post very bizarre. I've re-read it several times and the only thing that stands out to me is how visceral your disagreement with me on this issue must be for you to have written such a longwinded screed. I can only assume you take great delight in our current debauched culture, to the extent that you recoiled in horror when you read my post and set about typing up what is essentially an apologetic for narcissism, degeneracy and perversion. Unless you're consuming massive amounts of pornography I don't understand how you could elevate sexual debauchery over traditional society. Who in their right mind would seriously make the argument that sadomasochistic sex with a whore like your favorite Belle Knox is superior to becoming the patriarch of your own family? If you honestly believe that, then your mind has been warped. That's preaching the culture of death and decay. We are more than animals, and the highest good in life is not to be found by pumping your dick in and out of wet holes.

[Sp5]

"Debauchery?" There has always been debauchery. It takes different forms. The Victorian era was full of brothels. Now, it's free.

Like the Victorian, the current culture is a mix of prudery and debauchery. Both the prudery and debauchery take different forms. It has another thing exactly similar, hypocrisy.

"Debauchery" is a vague word. It's in the eye of the beholder. Most people would probably think that a threesome with two Colombian women is debauchery. Or banging 100 Thai women in six months, that would also be considered debauched by most AFCs (maybe with envy) and certainly by women.

So, isn't this forum about debauchery? Life, liberty and the pursuit of debauchery?

In no other time have so many people had so much agency, prosperity and mobility. It's called freedom. Let the good times roll. Some guys want to be patriarchs, some want S&M with Belle Knox, some want both. It will always be so. Some people are bothered by other people's private choices. They can't take the strain of others being different from them and wanting different things. It's the authoritarian impulse. I don't care what others are doing if it's not harmful to me, unwilling others or the environment.

Lizard is right, why "lose the world" as it presents such opportunities to moan about some "traditional" culture that never existed as you imagine.

[K Galt]

Quote:

That was the most painfully overwritten and rambling attempt at a rebuttal I've ever seen on the forum. I'm not even sure what the point behind that post was, Lizard. Did it really require that many words to call me an ideologue who cowers before the future? And do you feel better after getting that off your chest? I especially liked the part where you couldn't resist talking about Belle Knox's "lean teenage body" and "invitingly meaty ass". You're clearly the type of sex-obsessed guy I was talking about, so it's no wonder that post struck a nerve with you. But really, I'm not sure why you're so threatened by the idea that a more traditional society would be a much better place for men (and women, and children) to live. Unless you're some kind of degenerate sex pervert it should be fairly obvious that sexual pleasure is not the most important thing in life. Even on a forum devoted to game most guys understand that intuitively.

I honestly find your post very bizarre. I've re-read it several times and the only thing that stands out to me is how visceral your disagreement with me on this issue must be for you to have written such a longwinded screed. I can only assume you take great delight in our current debauched culture, to the extent that you recoiled in horror when you read my post and set about typing up what is essentially an apologetic for narcissism, degeneracy and perversion. Unless you're consuming massive amounts of pornography I don't understand how you could elevate sexual debauchery over traditional society. Who in their right mind would seriously make the argument that sadomasochistic sex with a whore like your favorite Belle Knox is superior to becoming the patriarch of your own family? If you honestly believe that, then your mind has been warped. That's preaching the culture of death and decay. We are more than animals, and the highest good in life is not to be found by pumping your dick in and out of wet holes.

I think Lizard's rambling screed is just more evidence that the man needs a drink...



But seriously.

I find it amusing how many folks turned this thread into a catch all indictment of the 1950's.

Nobody ever claimed the 50's were perfect.

It was merely the turning point for a dramatic cultural shift in attitudes. It was the last decade where sluttery, adultery, infanticide (aka abortion), bastardy, free-for-all divorce and a welfare state that subsidized single mother households (aka The Garbage Generation) were not commonly accepted, celebrated and encouraged by society at large.

If you think all those things are cool because they contribute to the easy pussy of rampant sluttery in today's day and age, you're simply thinking with the wrong head.

[Vicious]

I wouldn't change a thing. Ripple effect.
Change a little thing in something as central in many people lives as the social culture and you will get side effects that will prove far more negative.

While it's fun to muse on you can't cherry pick what parts in a culture you want to have.

[Jackreacher]

The culture we live in is already fading into further obscurity. A quick example of this if you look back 10-20 years people took genuine pride in how they labeled themselves; Father, stone mason, caregiver, soldier, christian, artist people would go through great pains to be closely embody or associate with these titles. Now you see people don't much care for being identified as anything and if so not for very long. Religion is disintegrating under the weight of common sense and scientific discovery, the foundation of a vast array of different traditions. Ritual behavior(like eating together at the dinner table) once vitally important to maintain group cohesion for the survival of the group is now seen as antiquated and unnecessary activities for the individual who can take care of himself/herself.

To answer Frenchie's question would I give up the cad lifestyle to live in this universe where men are respected and women understand their roles as child bearers and nurturers? Personally I'm not sure I'd be happy with such a one dimensional view predominating all over society, where females are primarily considered child bearers and nurturers. I think that strict sense of identification would cause more harm to my current mode of living then I would like. I don't know if that would contribute to my happiness, I don't know if most men would be happier with that. Maybe it looks that way on the surface because of the current pitiful state most men find themselves in today where they feel helpless or powerless in the sexual market but I somehow don't feel that pointing to all women and saying "You are the bitches" is going to make me happy at an intrinsic level. I mean lets be honest here, what about sluts? How do sluts factor into this universe of nurturing child bearers? I just cannot fathom a happy universe without a few sluts thrown into the mix. Sure lots of nurturing women, fine. But you know, throw in the next door cock swallower who can keep her mouth shut later. Now that's a perfect universe.

[FrenchCanadian]

Often when I've just dumped my semen in a random girl, I feel very philosophical for the minute or two after my orgasm.
She lays her head on my chest. I look up at the ceiling, and I ponder about why I love doing it so much.
During that minute I reflect a lot about myself... I know I love women, and making money more than anything else in the world.

During that minute, I realize how shallow and meaningless my life really is.

[j r]

Maybe I'm not as bright as I think I am, but all the evidence being out forth in support of the past seems hollow to me.

For one thing, puttin the 1950's ideal forward as traditional is just plain incorrect. The idea of people leaving the place where they are born and setting up a self-contained nuclear family is a very modern idea. Tradition is the extended family and the clan. Tradition is tribal.

If anything, the dysfunctional parts of America are dysfunctional precisely because they've regressed from the modern to the tribal. Walk into a shitty neighborhood and sooner or later someone will ask you who you know, who your family is, who your friends are.

The thing that makes modern life possible is that people can trust and have interactions with people that they don't personally know. I can walk into a store and give a total stranger a piece of plastic or pieces of paper and walk out with valuable goods. That's a fucking miracle. As much of a miracle as penicillin. Why would I want to go backwards?

Also, if people aren't respecting you as a man, stop blaming society and work to improve yourself.

[Sir Vigorous]

As a black, I wouldn't go back to the 1950's. Personally I wish I could've skipped ahead to the 2050's.

[Handsome Creepy Eel]

If it were just about me, I'd take the opportunity and get back to the 50's. The overall cost/benefit ratio is just too favorable for me in that case to not go back. However, if it was about the entire world, then no. I think it would inevitably spiral into some sort of a dangerous butterfly effect. Besides, my future keeps improving every day. In 10 years, I mgiht not even consider such an opportunity, let alone take it.

[Samseau]

Not sure what the obsession with the 1950's is all about. That's not the only historical example of virtuous women. American women were also praised for being good housewives in the 19th century as well by Alexis de Tocqueville. There are a lot of ways to have loyal women without being some kind of super rigorous society. There are also records of Spartan women being excellent wives and mothers, as well as Roman women. There are also records of these same women becoming worthless trash as the culture died.

In the early days of America, a man would grow up in a village, find a wife from one of the girls who grew up in the same village, and then go start a pioneer farm. Often times they had nothing and were perfectly content with each other's company. They would have a huge family and be active participants in their small communities. Life was a lot of hard work but they got to see and live on their efforts.

Imagine finding a woman today who'd want to start a farm with you in the middle of the wilderness? A modern woman today wouldn't know what to do with herself without 4G or wifi access.

Not sure why any guys would find such a life objectionable. Certainly, such a life would not have the extreme highs a player gets from his sexual addictions, but the rewards of having a loyal and loving wife, as well as a huge brood of children, seem to offset the downsides.

LizardofOz Wrote:

the basic nature of women, and of men's relation to them, has never changed.

I've often pondered such a thesis myself, but if women and men's relations have never changed, why were women much more likely to have huge families in the past than they were today?

Obviously slutty women cannot have huge families with different fathers since none of them would stick around, so judging from the commonness of big families in the past I must reject your assertion. The relations between men and women can and do change, and historical accounts plus hard evidence of family formation patterns show us when and where women were wives or sluts.

[Samseau]

(03-31-2014 10:37 AM)Sir Vigorous Wrote:  

As a black, I wouldn't go back to the 1950's. Personally I wish I could've skipped ahead to the 2050's.

I see a lot of black players in here thinking that if we were to move back into America's past, that also means things would become more racist.

Obviously I don't think anyone is saying we'd take everything back from the past.

Also, there's really nothing to say America will not become more racist and divided than it is today, even if the women remain slutty. It's not like slutty women are a safeguard against racism. Racism seems to be it's own issue unrelated from the behavior of women.

It is not impossible to imagine a traditional society that would also be accepting of inter-racial marriages while still being opposed to hook-ups.

[Vicious]

(03-31-2014 04:09 PM)Samseau Wrote:  

(03-31-2014 10:37 AM)Sir Vigorous Wrote:  

As a black, I wouldn't go back to the 1950's. Personally I wish I could've skipped ahead to the 2050's.

I see a lot of black players in here thinking that if we were to move back into America's past, that also means things would become more racist.

Obviously I don't think anyone is saying we'd take everything back from the past.

Also, there's really nothing to say America will not become more racist and divided than it is today, even if the women remain slutty. It's not like slutty women are a safeguard against racism. Racism seems to be it's own issue unrelated from the behavior of women.

It is not impossible to imagine a traditional society that would also be accepting of inter-racial marriages while still being opposed to hook-ups.

Actually feminism (2nd wave mostly) and black people's civil liberties in the US has gone in parallel.
The same civil liberties development has occurred in pretty much the whole western world.

Sluttiness is just the symptom. So no, these things don't happen in a vacuum.

There is no cherry picking.

[RawGod]

(03-31-2014 06:37 AM)Jackreacher Wrote:  

The culture we live in is already fading into further obscurity. A quick example of this if you look back 10-20 years people took genuine pride in how they labeled themselves; Father, stone mason, caregiver, soldier, christian, artist

Yep, back in 2004, those were the days...I could wander into the Stonemason's Quarter of the old city and be surrounded by those humble, honest Christian artists. Sadly, even by 2006 it was going downhill and by 2008 the centuries' old order had been completely overturned. One of these days I'll make a pilgrimage back to those ancient streets and pour out a libation to that civilisation, now so long gone in the Olde Days of 2004...

[FrenchCanadian]

(03-31-2014 06:13 PM)RawGod Wrote:  

(03-31-2014 06:37 AM)Jackreacher Wrote:  

The culture we live in is already fading into further obscurity. A quick example of this if you look back 10-20 years people took genuine pride in how they labeled themselves; Father, stone mason, caregiver, soldier, christian, artist

Yep, back in 2004, those were the days...I could wander into the Stonemason's Quarter of the old city and be surrounded by those humble, honest Christian artists. Sadly, even by 2006 it was going downhill and by 2008 the centuries' old order had been completely overturned. One of these days I'll make a pilgrimage back to those ancient streets and pour out a libation to that civilisation, now so long gone in the Olde Days of 2004...

aye, those were the good olde days indeed. caregivers took actual pride in bringing the villagers some heartfelt care. When soldiers came back from war and as they were walking down the town square and the common folks welcomed them as heroes,.... you could see the pride glimmer in their eyes.

[gringochileno]

Personally I wouldn't. As much as we complain about how degenerate and unfeminine women have become, the easy availability of pussy is definitely a positive side effect of our current cultural norms. Think about how intolerable society would be if we had the same problems with female attitude, obesity, pixie cuts, tattoos, divorce rape etc etc and on top of all that, it was insanely hard to get a girl to put out. Lots of things about current Western society are probably harmful to the society at large, and are definitely harmful to women, but at this point in my life having easier access to a variety of no-commitment vagina than at any point in history is pretty good compensation. Maybe I'll feel differently in 10 years but this horndog is happy for now.

[CactusCat589]

The more I think about it, the more I would realize, no. I would rather more and more guys see things closer to what they really are regarding the nature of women and the system, cast off the yoke, and rise beyond the narrative that society has planned for them. The world will revert to the mean, and somewhere down the line our descendants will enjoy a more sane way of doing things. In the meantime, those men who want it bad enough will find a way to carve out their own place in the world, on their own terms.

[Vitriol]

(03-30-2014 05:12 PM)The Lizard of Oz Wrote:  

It is easy to be seduced by the ideologue's thin and single-minded fervor, and not realize that in his text, life itself has already been betrayed and evacuated; and further, that he cannot cash the check he has written.

"Meaning" is not something that can be delivered by thin ideas like "traditional masculinity" or (on the other end of the spectrum) "saving the environment", or whatever other vacuous slogans we are accosted by. Life can be found meaningful if it is lived by a man who is willing to think and feel, and to be humble and patient in the face of the endless interest and variety of reality.

I mostly agree with what you're saying. But this also entails that we're basically talking apes who are staring into the abyss. Not even the greatest thinkers mankind has ever produced managed to put all of the pieces of the puzzle together perfectly, which is why the nostalgia for cookie-cutter 1905s suburbia is even more laughable.

The universe is a cold and uncaring place, we're just strapped to this one rock and taking a (relatively short) ride. There's no turning back the clock to some grand age of masculinity, which as others have noted, probably never existed. You were more likely to die of an infection on a battlefield than achieve greatness in past ages.

[Saga]

(03-31-2014 05:14 PM)Vicious Wrote:  

Actually feminism (2nd wave mostly) and black people's civil liberties in the US has gone in parallel.
The same civil liberties development has occurred in pretty much the whole western world.

Aside from the shared timeline, it'd be hard to demonstrate such a link...MLK and Malcolm X (among others) had little if any ideological or organizational connections with 2nd wave feminist groups. That didn't stop feminists of the era from constantly attempting to proclaim their aims as one with black civil rights, but it remains as it was: an act of pure opportunism.

[Biologist]

I wouldn't want to change it back.

I cannot imagine anything worse than getting married in your early 20s, spending years looking after screaming children and spending the rest of your life banging only one woman.

In the 1950s, the price of pussy was lifelong marriage. The price now much lower. I personally prefer being able to go to a bar or club to get drunk and pick up some slut whenever I feel like it.

I also prefer my freedom and disposable income living as a non-married guy. I can spend the weekend eating pizza and playing video games, or I could go to South-East Asia for a couple of weeks to bang chicks whenever I please.

In the 1950s, it was a social expectation for a man to get married and have children. If you weren't married, you were shunned by your family, friends and society in general. People would often spread rumours that you were gay. No only that, it was much harder for a man to get a job or promotion if he was not married.

[funkyzeit]

Yes, I would adapt easily and gladly.

[la_mode]

No. Society has always been generally insufferable.

[Vicious]

(03-31-2014 11:09 PM)Saga Wrote:  

(03-31-2014 05:14 PM)Vicious Wrote:  

Actually feminism (2nd wave mostly) and black people's civil liberties in the US has gone in parallel.
The same civil liberties development has occurred in pretty much the whole western world.

Aside from the shared timeline, it'd be hard to demonstrate such a link...MLK and Malcolm X (among others) had little if any ideological or organizational connections with 2nd wave feminist groups. That didn't stop feminists of the era from constantly attempting to proclaim their aims as one with black civil rights, but it remains as it was: an act of pure opportunism.

The burden of proof is rather on the other side, to prove that civil liberties movements where completely independent of another and did not gain traction from each others successes.