The 'Dangerous Rise' Of Men Who Won’t Date Woke Women

[LordsFire]

That was the point of my aside about a "diverse postmodern society". No one set of moral values or norms reigns supreme and thus can not inform law as it once did.

Which is a very important thing that so many people do not understand has been lost.

If there is no moral standard beyond each individual's personal preference, eventually you will have a lawless society.

 

[Deleted member 88]

Which is a very important thing that so many people do not understand has been lost.

If there is no moral standard beyond each individual's personal preference, eventually you will have a lawless society.

Or really a society held together only by the monopoly of violence wielded by the state. That's about where we are at now.

 

[CarlManvers2019]

Which is a very important thing that so many people do not understand has been lost.

If there is no moral standard beyond each individual's personal preference, eventually you will have a lawless society.

Lawless? Nah, there will probably eventually be an elite taking over who are sort of immune from the constant checks for microaggressions and other accusations those below experience

An elite that pays lip service and/or to varying degrees buy into the bullshit itself

Impose a rather confusing and repressive set of laws on the people on pain of death or worse

Or really a society held together only by the monopoly of violence wielded by the state. That's about where we are at now.

Don’t forget, the severe self made confusion which prevents them from realizing whom their oppressors are and instead blaming it on something else

Or even outright saying that the problems don’t exist

 

[Deleted member 88]

Not death yet, just social ostracism and losing one's job/reputation/career/public shaming.

 

[Sailor.X]

“Incels”

Yeah, they may not all totally avoid women altogether, but them disengaging from possible threats will still get them this title

Incels and feminists are too sides of the same coin. I have come to this realization after talking with a shit ton of incels. All and I mean all of them have been just as toxic as the feminsts. So pox on both houses as far as I am concerned.

 

[LifeisTiresome]

Incels and feminists are too sides of the same coin. I have come to this realization after talking with a shit ton of incels. All and I mean all of them have been just as toxic as the feminsts. So pox on both houses as far as I am concerned.

Incels have more self-loathing. Feminists don't self loathe cause of sheer entitlement and narcissism. Its just their entitlement is socially acceptable.

 

[Sailor.X]

Uh

I don’t know about you but older men having relationships and sex with younger women feels creepy to me

That said, I wouldn’t be surprised if there are even women in their thirties who are still fertile and have kids

One possible problem I think you guys will get is attempts to lower the population of say, white people, by imposing penalties for them havinh more kids

Because they consume more respurces and stuff

My Father was 55 years old when He married my mother. And she was 25. They were married for 25 years before he died. Nothing creepy about it at all.

Incels have more self-loathing. Feminists don't self loathe cause of sheer entitlement and narcissism. Its just their entitlement is socially acceptable.

Incels don't want to take advice on self improvement when they ask you specifically. They don't want to hear about habits they have that are hindering them. Trust me I have banged my head up against that wall enough to learn this about them. I try t mentor people in my off time.

 

[LifeisTiresome]

Incels don't want to take advice on self improvement when they ask you specifically. They don't want to hear about habits they have that are hindering them. Trust me I have banged my head up against that wall enough to learn this about them. I try t mentor people in my off time.

Sure. I'm not disagreeing with you. I'm just saying that Incels differ in that they hate themselves and are very blackpilled. They believe that are genetic inferiors that in another age could have at least died in wars and got some honor that way but in this age are made to suffer.

Feminists don't hate themselves for reasons I've already mentioned.

 

[Deleted member 88]

Aesthetically it "feels" creepy, at least to younger generations. Because there is a spoken and unspoken ideal that romantic love between men and women involves them being about the same or similar in age, and thus "on an even field".

As for the above, usually that was due to the man having established himself-a job, education, and so on.

He might not be young and spry, or really even exciting, handsome or relatable-but marrying a man thirty years your senior meant you were set for life(most of the time).

A younger man is far less likely to have his life set and the resources necessary to support a wife and children, which meant that while you might date younger men, you'd marry your boss or some older man from church or whoever.

Which goes to the social function of marriage-its not about passionate "sexy" love between young people, its about stability more than anything else, especially at a societal level.

Women also in general will seek to pursue men with the resources to support them.

 

[Sailor.X]

Sure. I'm not disagreeing with you. I'm just saying that Incels differ in that they hate themselves and are very blackpilled. They believe that are genetic inferiors that in another age could have at least died in wars and got some honor that way but in this age are made to suffer.

Feminists don't hate themselves for reasons I've already mentioned.

That self loathing turns into anger against people trying to help them when they are confronted with things they can change. That is why I said two sides of the same coin.

 

[LifeisTiresome]

That self loathing turns into anger against people trying to help them when they are confronted with things they can change. That is why I said two sides of the same coin.

Indeed. They do self loathe and loathe others because of that. I just felt that we needed to clarify that difference between them.

 

[Fleiur]

Aesthetically it "feels" creepy, at least to younger generations. Because there is a spoken and unspoken ideal that romantic love between men and women involves them being about the same or similar in age, and thus "on an even field".

As for the above, usually that was due to the man having established himself-a job, education, and so on.

He might not be young and spry, or really even exciting, handsome or relatable-but marrying a man thirty years your senior meant you were set for life(most of the time).

A younger man is far less likely to have his life set and the resources necessary to support a wife and children, which meant that while you might date younger men, you'd marry your boss or some older man from church or whoever.

Which goes to the social function of marriage-its not about passionate "sexy" love between young people, its about stability more than anything else, especially at a societal level.

Women also in general will seek to pursue men with the resources to support them.

So at the end of the day, it's all about the money?

 

[Bacle]

Or really a society held together only by the monopoly of violence wielded by the state. That's about where we are at now.

That is how it has always been; pretention otherwise is naivite at it's worst.

I do not like that this is true, but civilization never has been anything but that, and I for one have intention of trying to pretend otherwise.

Also, there was *never* been a time when one moral set ruled the world, much less the Judeo-Chriatian sects. Saying otherwise is acting like the historical world never existed outside and independent of Christianity when many did and some still effectively do.

This is why I say I am spiritual but not religious, so as not to associate myself with this sort of narrow historical view point. Maybe Jesus was a spiritual manifestation of that spiritual world, or maybe Abraham was, or Allah, or Vishnu, or the Pharaohs, or Buddha, or any of thousand other prophets and demigods of other faith's.

And I want to point something out that the hard Christian/religious-conservative members of this forum need to realize.

The more you lot go on about a your hidden, or not so hidden, puritanical views, the more ammo you give the Far-Left and the harder you make it for moderates and centrists to stand sharing political parties with you.

If you all would shut the fuck up for a few years, we could kill the Far-Left and you could probably get 75%-85% of what you want and find a way to get by on the rest.

But no, none of you are willing to fucking put a sock in it long enough to rob the Far-Left of more and more ammo.

We have issues with Woke Woman and their crap because in part because you all won't stop wasting time on a battle you lost long ago.

 

[Deleted member 88]

So at the end of the day, it's all about the money?

In the end just about everything in this world is.

 

[almostinsane]

That is how it has always been; pretention otherwise is naivite at it's worst.

I do not like that this is true, but civilization never has been anything but that, and I for one have intention of trying to pretend otherwise.

Also, there was *never* been a time when one moral set ruled the world, much less the Judeo-Chriatian sects. Saying otherwise is acting like the historical world never existed outside and independent of Christianity when many did and some still effectively do.

This is why I say I am spiritual but not religious, so as not to associate myself with this sort of narrow historical view point. Maybe Jesus was a spiritual manifestation of that spiritual world, or maybe Abraham was, or Allah, or Vishnu, or the Pharaohs, or Buddha, or any of thousand other prophets and demigods of other faith's.

And I want to point something out that the hard Christian/religious-conservative members of this forum need to realize.

The more you lot go on about a your hidden, or not so hidden, puritanical views, the more ammo you give the Far-Left and the harder you make it for moderates and centrists to stand sharing political parties with you.

If you all would shut the fuck up for a few years, we could kill the Far-Left and you could probably get 75%-85% of what you want and find a way to get by on the rest.

But no, none of you are willing to fucking put a sock in it long enough to rob the Far-Left of more and more ammo.

We have issues with Woke Woman and their crap because in part because you all won't stop wasting time on a battle you lost long ago.

I don't think anyone on the thread has talked about enforcing morals via the state.

 

[Cherico]

I don't think anyone on the thread has talked about enforcing morals via the state.

China is currently trying that.....

It hasn't worked out so well for them.

 

[Deleted member 88]

I don't think anyone on the thread has talked about enforcing morals via the state.

Well I sort of have, in the sense I have said it’s not practical or politically feasible.

 

[LordsFire]

That is how it has always been; pretention otherwise is naivite at it's worst.

I do not like that this is true, but civilization never has been anything but that, and I for one have intention of trying to pretend otherwise.

Also, there was *never* been a time when one moral set ruled the world, much less the Judeo-Chriatian sects. Saying otherwise is acting like the historical world never existed outside and independent of Christianity when many did and some still effectively do.

This is why I say I am spiritual but not religious, so as not to associate myself with this sort of narrow historical view point. Maybe Jesus was a spiritual manifestation of that spiritual world, or maybe Abraham was, or Allah, or Vishnu, or the Pharaohs, or Buddha, or any of thousand other prophets and demigods of other faith's.

And I want to point something out that the hard Christian/religious-conservative members of this forum need to realize.

The more you lot go on about a your hidden, or not so hidden, puritanical views, the more ammo you give the Far-Left and the harder you make it for moderates and centrists to stand sharing political parties with you.

If you all would shut the fuck up for a few years, we could kill the Far-Left and you could probably get 75%-85% of what you want and find a way to get by on the rest.

But no, none of you are willing to fucking put a sock in it long enough to rob the Far-Left of more and more ammo.

We have issues with Woke Woman and their crap because in part because you all won't stop wasting time on a battle you lost long ago.

Where did this rant come from?

I never claimed that the whole world was dominated by a Judeo-Christian culture. The USA certainly was, and that was what I was referring to. Europe also was, though to a lesser degree, and it definitely isn't anymore.

I've seen one or two people advocating something closer to theocracy, but for myself, I'm quite aware that it is no business of the state to keep yourself from hurting yourself, just other people (in objectively measurable ways).