Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 21 to 33 of 33
  1. #21
    Senior Member Opaque's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2016
    Location
    Planet Earth/Northern Hemisphere/Land of Low wages & High taxes
    Posts
    1,441
    Reputation
    10884
    Type
    UNAPPEASABLE.

    Re: Michaela Peterson divorcees and hooks up with a thug

    Quote Originally Posted by Jackoff View Post
    Can you expand on this a little? I see a benefit in that it can force a guy to think things out for himself, but without the support of others providing the pieces it can be very difficult to see the whole picture. Hell, it can be difficult enough even when you do have the complete puzzle to work with.
    Gosh, that was a typo!

    I meant to say we actually need to look out for each other more. Let's face it, men are their own worst enemies. It's all good and well talking about female manipulation, but how often have you been manipulated by other men?

    On this very forum, we have some conflict because men like to think they are always right and they have tunnel vision. One thing that women excel at is the ability to dialogue through a given topic. To see the intricacies and work through them. Men have an aversion to that, and prefer to "settle the matter". This is a good habit to have in business, but not in life and relationships in general.

    This relates to your "complete the puzzle" idea. Yes, the brain is hardwired (for good reason) to seek meaning and make connections; men are (generally) superior to women when it comes to abstract thought and they have a huge capacity for it.

    But, you have to actually realise that life is a constant struggle to live "without knowing" in the "grey area". There will always be things you don't know, even if you have all the info at hand - and you make a calculated risk based on the info available.

    I guess the problem that men face is they see self improvement always via "knowing", acquiring knowledge, developing certain hobbies, becoming financially free.

    Women on the other hand have a much more social way of "improvement"; and they are also good at persuading (and manipulating) governments to offer this support when it doesn't exist.

    A woman can easily call another woman and tell her she has depression.

    A man cannot do that, and he would probably be ridiculed for it. I made a post a long long while ago about what we can learn from women. Some ridiculed it, others counter argued and so forth - it just didn't dawn on the forum participants that actually women do have some superior skills which we as men need to utilise so we can advocate for out own interests as well.
    A mother cannot raise a boy to be a man, not because he needs a father figure; but because she favours team vagina over her own son.

    Tradcon women are the most manipulative of all kinds of women, because they infect you with false hope.
    Radfems are your best friend, because they hate you and verbalise it - that's honesty!

    The red pill rage is a process which takes many many years - so be kind and patient with yourself; you will overcome it!

  2. #22
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2019
    Posts
    998
    Reputation
    2706
    Type
    Ghost

    Re: Michaela Peterson divorcees and hooks up with a thug

    Quote Originally Posted by Opaque View Post
    On this very forum, we have some conflict because men like to think they are always right and they have tunnel vision. One thing that women excel at is the ability to dialogue through a given topic. To see the intricacies and work through them. Men have an aversion to that, and prefer to "settle the matter". This is a good habit to have in business, but not in life and relationships in general.
    This is an interesting observation and one that is quite often true due to anger and rage caused by our particular experiences, but maybe it’s not as prevalent as would at first seem.

    When posting online, conversation is usually along the lines of “this is my view on the matter” and whilst there might be some small debate the conversation tends to end quite abruptly – I’ve said what I believe and am willing to leave it at that and let others think what they might. This is fair enough because to do otherwise, and considering the slow nature of online posting, conversations could take weeks, and because of this tangents are difficult to bring back into line – keeping to the point is almost impossible!

    Compare this to real life debates between friends, of which I have had many:

    We each have our positions and are willing to defend them by citing precedent and reason, just as we do online. However IRL the conversation is much more fluid and reactions are more quickly received – resolution is often achieved in a single night’s conversation even if that resolution is agreement to disagree. On top of that we have other cues on which to pick up; we can see uncertainty in the faces and the tones of voice of others so we realise that maybe these views aren’t as entrenched as it would maybe seem if their words were in printed form. Nuance is everything.

    And one last observation r.e. entrenchment:

    During these debates people don’t like to give ground – we want to win the debate. This is natural behaviour because unless you thought your view was the right view there would be no point in debating in the first place, right?

    However, these debates often recur and on occasion, very rarely I admit, I have had the same debate with the same person many months later and because each of us put up such a strong argument, with reflection, we each convinced the other that we were right, and so the debate continues only this time each of us are arguing in favour of the points the other had made the first time round. This may sound strange (and maybe confusing) but it has happened to me on more than one occasion.

    So my conclusion is: whilst in any particular debate people can indeed seem entrenched, given enough time people’s views can and will change given the proper exposure to alternative views.


    As for women being able to “dialogue through a given topic”, if you don’t mind me employing just a little sarcasm, not only do they dialogue through said topic, but with total disregard to reason and well thought out argument they steamroll through it, come out the other end, turn down another avenue, and you end up debating a totally different topic.

    Whilst I admit there are exceptions to every rule, this has been my experience in trying to debate with women. They turn the topic to one on which you can agree and this somehow, in their minds, validates all their previous views even if totally unrelated.

    Someone once said with regards to arguments/debates: the worst thing that can happen is to win an argument when you are in the wrong – all it does is re-inforce an errant view.


    A woman can easily call another woman and tell her she has depression.

    I made a post a long long while ago about what we can learn from women. Some ridiculed it, others counter argued and so forth - it just didn't dawn on the forum participants that actually women do have some superior skills which we as men need to utilise so we can advocate for out own interests as well.
    Mmm. The ability to talk about their feelz. The one you cite is depression, so let’s explore that as it is something I have some experience with from my past.

    I agree that a woman can call their friends on the phone and cry and say “I’m feeling down” because she’s just gone through a breakup or whatever and her friends will listen and rally round. They’ll organise nights out or nights in to raise her spirits.

    Men on the other hand will indeed ridicule, will seem indifferent, and will say things like “cop yourself on”, or “man up”, or “stop being a pussy”.

    But these are merely different tactics to the same effect – get over it!

    With depression it is very different. There is no consoling other than listening. No matter what advice you (male or female) might have to offer it almost certainly has already been considered and rejected. They (we) think about these things constantly. There is no stone they leave unturned. (Well, O.K. there may be some but that would entail a much more in-depth discussion.)

    After a couple of conversations (at best) along these lines the friend begins to avoid them because they realise that they have nothing left to say, there is nothing they can do, and they are also being emotionally brought down themselves. Sad, but a totally understandable protective measure that women will employ just as much as men, maybe even more so – girls just want to have fun, right?


    Anyhow, with regards to women’s behaviour in general, it might surprise you to read this but I agree with much of what you have to say about the effectiveness of the efforts of women to advocate to their own benefit. It’s just that to my way of thinking effective does not equate to right. You may think of this as naïve, or maybe some leftover of blue-pill indoctrination but I don’t think so.

    Let me cite some behaviours that I deem effective but are nonetheless morally wrong (IMO).

    In no particular order:

    Manipulation, theft, bullying, fraud, murder, exploitation of another’s ignorance, rape, misrepresentation, lying, defamation, genocide, and I’m sure you can add others.

    Now sometimes these things can be warranted, for example the killing of another can be warranted in the case of self-defence or the defence of others; or the theft of food to feed oneself and/or one’s family can be warranted, but these are extreme cases. I assume you would not advocate them as a general way of living but merely as a reaction to a SPECIFIC circumstance or set of circumstances.

    But to bring it back to women and their manipulation tactics: Am I capable of employing said tactics? Absolutely! And on the rare occasion when I choose to do so I assure you I am VERY effective. I plan it in great detail and consider as many possible reactions as I can and have many backup measures/arguments in place.

    Even then sometimes I lose because of blue pill prejudice, but still I win because my assailant gets destroyed – I make certain of that with never a lie coming out of my mouth. Credibility still means a lot even in today’s fucked up society.

    But…

    Whilst I have absolutely no problem with using their own tactics against them, I will only employ them as a form of self-defence WHEN USED AGAINST ME DIRECTLY, for example, if they try to turn my employer against me it is personal.

    What they are doing to society is an attack against me, you and every other man on the planet, but it is an indirect attack. They are manipulating the decision makers (bosses, lawmakers etc.) not me personally and for me to adopt said tactics as a way of being would be to make me one of them.

    This I will not tolerate.

    I do not want to think of myself as a manipulator any more than I want to think of myself as a thief or a killer. If needs must, then so be it, but until then… NO!

    For now I have other means of escape – MGTOW!

    I am not a M.R.A., much as I appreciate their efforts.

    Does this explain my position any more clearly?

    I look forward to your reaction and the reactions of all other members of this site.
    "Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety." - Benjamin Franklin

  3. #23
    Senior Member Azure Nomad's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Posts
    3,498
    Reputation
    16587
    Type
    Ghost

    Re: Michaela Peterson divorcees and hooks up with a thug

    Quote Originally Posted by Opaque View Post
    Yes, when you don't have a father, you begin to look for a father figure. Men not knowing how to put the pieces together is because they grow up stunted and disadvantaged in almost every aspect, social, education, economical - and no one is there to listen to their worries. As men, we do ourselves much good when we don't look after each other.
    While it is true that men are competitive with one another men are also capable of forming groups for great goals. The problem is in the 21st century men are distracted by a lot of distractions and are unable to come together for greater goals. This is why it is often said that for my generation aka milennials the war is a spiritual one. No wonder suicides are rising because young men are being misled to what it means to have personal and social goals.

    Without the spirit to aspire to something greater and to look after one another it is easy to fall prey into a nihilistic mindset or pure black pill concepts. However, some black pill concepts have merit and worth discussing openly but not to the extreme where it clouds the ability to see the greater good of helping those you care most for in your family, friends and community.

    As for the topic of manipulation...it can be defined in many ways. For me I always defined manipulation as being able to provoke a response through a series of calculated actions or behaviors for a desired personal outcome. However, if manipulation as it has been mention by Jackoff is for self preservation then it is worth considering.

    Women not only use manipulation for self preservation but even use manipulation of their outer appearance to further their goals.

    PUAs have mirrored this and which is why game is so effective. That is why blue pillers often call PUAs "manipulative". All PUAs are doing is flipping the script women have been using for thousands of years.

    The difference is that men can't dwell in that feminine energy for long because sooner or later it doesn't come off as genuine from a male point of view. And thus society can quickly catch on that something is off when a man is utilizing heavy manipulation. Women of course are given a green light by society to use manipulation because of their base nature.

    A man that can utilize stoicism with a touch of manipulation/machiavellianism has basically mastered the ability to read between the lines of the social fabric while manipulating outcomes. Blue pill men are playing checkers while red pill/black pill men are playing chess.

  4. #24
    Senior Member mgtower's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2019
    Location
    Dead body politic, deceased corporate corpse.
    Posts
    2,152
    Reputation
    9079
    Type
    Ghosted by law and order.

    Re: Michaela Peterson divorcees and hooks up with a thug

    A lesson on manipulation can be seen outside my front door in all the missing trees, I estimate thousands of TREES! Stay in one place long enough, you'll see they grow like grass, except MUCH LARGER! All dead and gone! Because under no condition should human life be lawfully made to dwell in what's become an unmitigated overgrown mismanaged forest that was once a promised residential housing subdivision, lawfully manipulated into a Massachusetts condemned family campground, a national disgrace, and an ongoing outstanding imminent threat to human life (including United State Citizens).

    Justice always finds a way, or a dead end, I found a way, and it's all perfectly legal, I succeeded and took measures necessary, as my body politic was lawfully executed by judicial and executive orders dating back to 1973 when property owners were evicted from their properties, resulting in a 1/10/1974 FINAL DECREE placing the entire development in peril.

    Some say this place is a different country a no man's land. All made possible by the stroke of a filthy pen.

    URGENT ICO: 1600 Pennsylvania AVE, Washington DC. 20006; FYI: (((TIMBER)))

    Location, location, location; https://www.google.com/maps/@42.2629...!3m1!1e3?hl=en
    MGTOW, defined:

    A place and time (where and when) the road to modern man's perdition ends abruptly and permanently.

  5. #25
    Senior Member Opaque's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2016
    Location
    Planet Earth/Northern Hemisphere/Land of Low wages & High taxes
    Posts
    1,441
    Reputation
    10884
    Type
    UNAPPEASABLE.

    Re: Michaela Peterson divorcees and hooks up with a thug

    Jackoff, first of all thank you for the reply and passionate response.
    You have raised some very valid points but here is my counter argument:

    So my conclusion is: whilst in any particular debate people can indeed seem entrenched, given enough time people’s views can and will change given the proper exposure to alternative views.


    This is of course true to those who may have adopted a certain ideology (e.g 3rd wave feminism), and when you speak to them, they are open minded, responsive, empathetic.

    I spoke with an African American lady a while back who was staunchly anti-Trump. I tried to explain to there the social intricacies and what led to Trump being elected and Brexit happening. I mentioned that, overall they aren't the best options but the best of the worst options available.


    I made the connection with identity politics, about how some women have made false rape allegations and how it ruined men's lives. She couldn't believe the stories and was shocked, we had a nice exchange and she had some food for thought.

    In other cases, a woman who is a 3rd wave feminist, even after being shown the evidence of how pernicious the movement is, will still pretend not to understand.

    Such women, or men (white knights, manginas) are simply there to profit from someone else's misery.

    They see a market and the get involved to make their lives better at the expense of others. With such people, the only thing that does work is manipulation.

    Why? because dialogue, language, empirical proof, statistics are dead. They simply disregard them.


    As for women being able to “dialogue through a given topic”, if you don’t mind me employing just a little sarcasm, not only do they dialogue through said topic, but with total disregard to reason and well thought out argument they steamroll through it, come out the other end, turn down another avenue, and you end up debating a totally different topic.


    Allow me to clarify; this is exactly what makes women good at argument.

    They employ sophisticated traps and devices which shock and knock you off your base. You cannot win against that. The only way to way to counter is, with sophisticated and manipulative tactics, but men are handicapped in regard.

    Should society then devolve to who can out-manipulate the other? No, I am a moralist - but I have to call a spade and spade and say that, the "right" way to argue doesn't do men any favours.

    If we want to proceed and get a better life, we have to politicise our identity. Just like the gay, lesbian community or whatever other minority identity. Again, is this right? Moral?

    No, but it is necessary unfortunately. How we do that? Some choose MRA, I choose MGTOW, others choose PUA, whatever. All these are valid ways to "go your own way".

    What is not a valid way in the current climate, is to choose to NOT politicise your identity. That will not work.

    Men on the other hand will indeed ridicule, will seem indifferent, and will say things like “cop yourself on”, or “man up”, or “stop being a pussy”.
    But these are merely different tactics to the same effect – get over it!
    Although many women only help out superficially "let's have a drink and raise your spirits"; women in general go much further than men when helping each other out.

    Let's take the idea of "political lesbianism".

    Some time ago, in American academia, some female academics had sex with other female academics, solely to make a statement that men are "not needed". They weren't lesbian, but did it to prove a point. In one way, you can admire people who go to this extent just to get their way in the world.


    Again, do I think men should do the same? Not at all, but, I think men like conflict too much to be able to gather together and get political goals achieved.

    It's important that we remain honest, men are prone to violence, commit more violent crimes than women, are willing to kill another man for their country's flag, bullying, School violence etc, I could go on. We can easily say "oh women do that too", but the truth is they don't; not to the same degree.

    Anyhow, with regards to women’s behaviour in general, it might surprise you to read this but I agree with much of what you have to say about the effectiveness of the efforts of women to advocate to their own benefit. It’s just that to my way of thinking effective does not equate to right. You may think of this as naïve, or maybe some leftover of blue-pill indoctrination but I don’t think so.


    Agreed. People lie everyday, and think nothing of it - it's completely natural, but it is immoral. People lie by omission, also immoral.

    Let me cite some behaviours that I deem effective but are nonetheless morally wrong (IMO).
    In no particular order:

    Manipulation, theft, bullying, fraud, murder, exploitation of another’s ignorance, rape, misrepresentation, lying, defamation, genocide, and I’m sure you can add others.
    Again, here I think we run into the problems of language.

    There was a thread "fair play" which I made several posts saying that there is no such thing as an objective valuation of a word. I used the example of "good". In ancient Greece, Zeus was "good" because he was strong, dominant and powerful.

    In the modern world 2020, "good" means someone is cooperative and generally sympathetic.

    Lets us take some of the words you have used:

    Theft for example, women actually steal things all the time. I was dating a girl a while back, we had great sex, and we were generally compatible. One day, as I leave the shower, I go into my room and she is pulling out several £20 notes. So, I ask her, "what are you doing!?" - she said, "well I need it".

    She didn't think this is "theft" and therefore "illegal". She doesn't even think the word "theft". Her process of thinking "I'd like a new Prada bag, oh here is some money, let's take it".

    She is operating on some primitive level where she just takes what she sees and has no guilt after wards. I mean she was so nonchalant and just replied "I need the money, so I took it".


    How about exploitation of another’s ignorance?

    There have been many times where I invited girls out and spent much money on them.

    They knew they were manipulating me for drinks and dinners. I wanted to have sex. They knew that I was ignorant and I wasn't going to get any sex.

    They could have said "wait, why are you buying this expensive cocktail, this is very nice of you, but why don't we just have a coffee and talk a walk in the park?" "why the expensive dinners?" "Let me pay this time, I insist".

    Again the female logic is: "he is a dumb idiot who thinks I will open my legs after the dinner and drinks, so let me manipulate him and enjoy my time. Why, well because I can. Why not?"

    How about rape?

    There are laws that define rape, what constitutes rape, what consent means etc. That changed in 2003 in the UK - the CPS (Crown Prosecution Service) changed the guidelines to include "affirmative consent" which means a woman can claim she was raped even if at the time, the man had full clear consent.

    The rabbit hole goes deeper, rape is actually a crime when a man violently assaults a women and penetrates her, which is the case, for example in the Middle East or South America.

    However, and this is a controversial however, a woman would probably think rape is actually "any man who is below average who enjoys sexual pleasure from my body, even if I consented at the time".

    So actually rape is simply when an average or below average man tries to seduce a woman, and the women uses it to destroy his life.

    Women don't think of the world in terms of "is this a moral thing to do?" they think along the lines of "well, I have to get what I want, and if a few men get fucked along the way, tough luck!". It isn't even vengeance or hatred, even that has some substance. If someone is vengeful, maybe they faced some injustice by the object of vengeance.

    The simply just don't care and don't allow worries to enter their mind about how their actions affect others.

    The outside world, other things, other people's feelings, other people's worries are not even on their radar!
    Last edited by Opaque; May 29, 2020 at 7:46 PM.
    A mother cannot raise a boy to be a man, not because he needs a father figure; but because she favours team vagina over her own son.

    Tradcon women are the most manipulative of all kinds of women, because they infect you with false hope.
    Radfems are your best friend, because they hate you and verbalise it - that's honesty!

    The red pill rage is a process which takes many many years - so be kind and patient with yourself; you will overcome it!

  6. #26
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2019
    Posts
    998
    Reputation
    2706
    Type
    Ghost

    Re: Michaela Peterson divorcees and hooks up with a thug

    @ Opaque

    Thank you for your considered reply, may I make some further observations?

    My statement:

    So my conclusion is: whilst in any particular debate people can indeed seem entrenched, given enough time people’s views can and will change given the proper exposure to alternative views.
    Your Counter:

    This is of course true to those who may have adopted a certain ideology (e.g 3rd wave feminism), and when you speak to them, they are open minded, responsive, empathetic.

    I spoke with an African American lady a while back who was staunchly anti-Trump. I tried to explain to there the social intricacies and what led to Trump being elected and Brexit happening. I mentioned that, overall they aren't the best options but the best of the worst options available.

    I made the connection with identity politics, about how some women have made false rape allegations and how it ruined men's lives. She couldn't believe the stories and was shocked, we had a nice exchange and she had some food for thought.

    In other cases, a woman who is a 3rd wave feminist, even after being shown the evidence of how pernicious the movement is, will still pretend not to understand.
    This is the difference between the sheep and the shepherds.

    The first woman you describe has been conned by the system – a sheep. She is indoctrinated just as much as any blue pill male and is exactly the type of woman that I believe can be red pilled. She is open to argument and is worth debating with. She is the type of person I was talking about when I said views can be changed.

    But of course there are others.

    The “other cases” you refer to know exactly what is happening – the shepherds, or extremists (whichever term you prefer). As you say they will still pretend not to understand, but they understand perfectly. Talking to such people is a waste of time and effort because they already know what they are doing. IMO they do not deserve to be even considered people. They know the truth but will never admit it. In other words – they are scum!

    Allow me to clarify; this is exactly what makes women good at argument

    They employ sophisticated traps and devices which shock and knock you off your base. You cannot win against that. The only way to way to counter is, with sophisticated and manipulative tactics, but men are handicapped in regard.
    Forgive me but this is wrong! Wrong, wrong, a thousand times wrong!

    You are correct in how you describe their tactics but this does not make them good at argument, this makes them good at believing – whatever the hell they want to believe. This is the very antithesis of argument. The hamster wheel is spinning at full throttle.


    I would disagree. Although many women only help out superficially "let's have a drink and raise your spirits"; women in general go much further than men when helping each other out

    On this we can agree, at least to a certain extent. If a woman feels like she has been wronged in some way by a man, and by this I don’t mean anything illegal or even immoral, for example being dumped, her friends (at least some of them) will help her plot and scheme his downfall in some way. This is not prevalent amongst men, at least in my experience.


    Let's take the idea of "political lesbianism".
    Mmm. If you insist. But this is the work of extremists, and only those in the media’s eye or are seeking to be so (otherwise what’s the point?). It would not be the work of the average Jane. But I do take your point that some are so entrenched in their views that they will resort to almost anything.

    By the way, if you have any video clips that prove this actually happens and isn’t just rhetoric to make a point, feel free to send them my way.

    It's important that we remain honest, men are prone to violence, commit more violent crimes than women, are willing to kill another man for their country's flag, bullying, School violence etc, I could go on. We can easily say "oh women do that too", but the truth is they don't; not to the same degree.
    I 100% agree. Men are far more direct when it comes to physical violence, and for a variety of reasons. Females though are also prone to violence for a variety of reasons; it’s just the methodology that often differs.

    Theft for example, women actually steal things all the time. I was dating a girl a while back, we had great sex, and we were generally compatible. One day, as I leave the shower, I go into my room and she is pulling out several £20 notes. So, I ask her, "what are you doing!?" - she said, "well I need it".

    She didn't think this is "theft" and therefore "illegal". She doesn't even think the word "theft". Her process of thinking "I'd like a new Prada bag, oh here is some money, let's take it".

    I beg to differ. She knew 100% that what she was doing was theft. I have come across such people myself, and not all of them female. “Oh look there’s something I want (not always money) I think I’ll just take that”. The reason she came across as innocent in some way is because she has been caught at it so many times she has perfected the “Oh, I didn’t see it that way” and “but I just thought” excuses. Scumbag thieving scum pure and simple. The same person would put a knife through your heart and use the same thinking to justify it to herself.


    Again the female logic is: "he is a dumb idiot who thinks I will open my legs after the dinner and drinks, so let me manipulate him and enjoy my time. Why, well because I can. Why not?"
    Exactly. Why not?

    There is no formal contract or even understanding. Any perceived understanding is complete nonsense – I buy you shit so you have to give up your pussy? There is absolutely no onus on the woman to accept this and why should she?

    Any time I took out a woman I’d just met and wined and dined her it wasn’t to get her in the sack exactly, although to be honest that was probably on my mind, it was to find out if I wanted to pursue any kind of relationship with her. Why should a woman be any different?

    That being said there are those, and they seem to be on the increase, that will play on this philosophy and simply use men for a free night out, I do understand this.

    How about rape?
    Here you play with legalities and technicalities. Fair enough I get where you’re coming from, but I wasn’t talking about legal/technical definitions, I was talking about the moral definition – intent.


    They don't think of the world in terms of "is this a moral thing to do?" they think along the lines of "well, I have to get what I want, and if a few men get fucked along the way, tough luck!". It isn't even vengeance or hatred, even that has some substance. If someone is vengeful, maybe they faced some injustice by the object of vengeance.

    The simply just don't care and don't allow worries to enter their mind about how their actions affect the world.

    The outside world, other things, other people's feelings, other people's worries are not even on their radar!

    Absolutely. Again I agree 100%. But that is them, not me. I don’t judge myself by the standards the blue pill world or women wish to impose on me. Nor do I judge others by my high standards, but there are some lines I will not cross and simply will not accept in others.

    I have my own set of standards that I live by. Whilst many of them concur with blue pill philosophy that is not my concern. Not everything about traditional social constructs and morality is wrong, in fact much of it I agree with, the main exception being male/female relationships – marriage.

    For example, I have a deep rooted distrust of organised religion, but should that mean when the Bible says “Thou shalt not kill” I should take the opposite stance? Obviously not.

    As MGTOW we set our own standards in life. In a way we are kind of handicapped in so far as we reject blue pill thinking so we have to work it all out for ourselves. As you are so fond of saying, this takes time and patience with ourselves. What is right and what is wrong? That is for each of us to decide.

    I have come a long way in the last 20 years, but there is still much I have to figure out.
    "Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety." - Benjamin Franklin

  7. #27
    Super Moderator Mr Wombat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Posts
    4,822
    Reputation
    23498
    Type
    Neutral

    Re: Michaela Peterson divorcees and hooks up with a thug

    Quote Originally Posted by Jackoff View Post
    Personally I wouldn't characterise him as a shill, I think it more likely he is confused and is being used by TPTB for their own goals. But that's just my opinion.
    I'd characterise him as mentally unstable. That's the reason people study psychology, you know: to try to manage what's going on inside their own heads. His 12 rules are his own rules for himself and his patients.

    I listened to a few clips, and wanted to interrupt: "Mr Peterson, that doesn't mean anything. What you just said. It doesn't actually mean anything." Psychobabble. Word salad.

  8. #28
    Senior Member Opaque's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2016
    Location
    Planet Earth/Northern Hemisphere/Land of Low wages & High taxes
    Posts
    1,441
    Reputation
    10884
    Type
    UNAPPEASABLE.

    Re: Michaela Peterson divorcees and hooks up with a thug

    I'd characterise him as mentally unstable. That's the reason people study psychology, you know: to try to manage what's going on inside their own heads. His 12 rules are his own rules for himself and his patients.
    I've noticed that too - he did check himself into a clinic after his wife passed away and he seems to be some very strict diets. All signs of someone who is unstable.
    A mother cannot raise a boy to be a man, not because he needs a father figure; but because she favours team vagina over her own son.

    Tradcon women are the most manipulative of all kinds of women, because they infect you with false hope.
    Radfems are your best friend, because they hate you and verbalise it - that's honesty!

    The red pill rage is a process which takes many many years - so be kind and patient with yourself; you will overcome it!

  9. #29
    Senior Member Opaque's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2016
    Location
    Planet Earth/Northern Hemisphere/Land of Low wages & High taxes
    Posts
    1,441
    Reputation
    10884
    Type
    UNAPPEASABLE.

    Re: Michaela Peterson divorcees and hooks up with a thug

    Forgive me but this is wrong! Wrong, wrong, a thousand times wrong!

    You are correct in how you describe their tactics but this does not make them good at argument, this makes them good at believing – whatever the hell they want to believe. This is the very antithesis of argument. The hamster wheel is spinning at full throttle.
    When I say "good" I don't mean in terms of making a good argument, I mean in terms of good at distracting and wasting the others time. Again, here comes the problems of language.

    Mmm. If you insist. But this is the work of extremists, and only those in the media’s eye or are seeking to be so (otherwise what’s the point?). It would not be the work of the average Jane. But I do take your point that some are so entrenched in their views that they will resort to almost anything.

    By the way, if you have any video clips that prove this actually happens and isn’t just rhetoric to make a point, feel free to send them my way.
    I can assure you that all women subscribe to this ideology in the way they live their lives. Maybe they won't go as far as these radical feminists, but they will not all hesitate in supporting them, even if it done tacitly. That makes them just as radical in my opinion.

    Here is a Wikipedia article for starters.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Political_lesbianism

    There is no formal contract or even understanding. Any perceived understanding is complete nonsense – I buy you shit so you have to give up your pussy? There is absolutely no onus on the woman to accept this and why should she?

    Any time I took out a woman I’d just met and wined and dined her it wasn’t to get her in the sack exactly, although to be honest that was probably on my mind, it was to find out if I wanted to pursue any kind of relationship with her. Why should a woman be any different?
    I think that is the correct way to think as a man, but I didn't know this until recently, and I assume many men actually don't know that dating is about finding out who is compatible and isn't something where you will get guaranteed sex. But even if you say it is only to find out if a relationship is worth perusing, the man still ends up paying.

    This actually makes my blood boil because I was often duped. You could say I duped myself, but then again, I have gone out with the same women, several times and always payed for the dinners and drinks. You would have though the woman may say "wait, why do you always pay? Why can't we split the bill?".
    A mother cannot raise a boy to be a man, not because he needs a father figure; but because she favours team vagina over her own son.

    Tradcon women are the most manipulative of all kinds of women, because they infect you with false hope.
    Radfems are your best friend, because they hate you and verbalise it - that's honesty!

    The red pill rage is a process which takes many many years - so be kind and patient with yourself; you will overcome it!

  10. #30
    Senior Member mgtower's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2019
    Location
    Dead body politic, deceased corporate corpse.
    Posts
    2,152
    Reputation
    9079
    Type
    Ghosted by law and order.

    Re: Michaela Peterson divorcees and hooks up with a thug

    Quote Originally Posted by Opaque View Post
    This actually makes my blood boil because I was often duped. You could say I duped myself, but then again, I have gone out with the same women, several times and always payed for the dinners and drinks. You would have though the woman may say "wait, why do you always pay? Why can't we split the bill?".
    I use simple formulas when prospecting for cooperation and mutual reciprocal benefits in human interactions. It's as easy as flicking off a leach before it has time to attach and drain your precious bodily fluids.

    Just last night, I said to a good friend (after haying a couple acres for cover needed in our gardens), This is mutual benefit, the way things should work, I get some much needed hay and you get a free slave (in a two man mission where with one is nearly impossible) The problem was a dust pan size grass catcher on a large diesel powered zero turn mower, jumping on and off to unload the catcher took more time than collecting it! He was still exhausted from the night before, and last night we filled his dump truck and my trailer.

    If one's human interactions aren't like this, it's because one has little or no self discipline, no homemade handbook of life's rules, or one's a leach.

    We each took turns mowing half the field, there was no arguments or disagreements, it went like clockwork, it was all about being fair and generous in a mutual beneficial friendship.

    To be enjoined to anything else is a living hell and endless misery. I don't argue and fight with friends because there's no need to when you have your own set of golden rules.

    MGTOW don't enjoin themselves to modern women for this exact same reason, there's always friction and never harmony, a life not worth living...
    MGTOW, defined:

    A place and time (where and when) the road to modern man's perdition ends abruptly and permanently.

  11. #31
    Senior Member Opaque's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2016
    Location
    Planet Earth/Northern Hemisphere/Land of Low wages & High taxes
    Posts
    1,441
    Reputation
    10884
    Type
    UNAPPEASABLE.

    Re: Michaela Peterson divorcees and hooks up with a thug

    It's as easy as flicking off a leach before it has time to attach and drain your precious bodily fluids.
    Yes, this is why I now have the rule that if there is no sexual interest, then I do not pay for anything more than a cup of coffee. It would have been good to have someone like you MGTOWER to teach me this when I was younger - unfortunately not knowing about this aspect of female behaviour is also a part of the plan.
    A mother cannot raise a boy to be a man, not because he needs a father figure; but because she favours team vagina over her own son.

    Tradcon women are the most manipulative of all kinds of women, because they infect you with false hope.
    Radfems are your best friend, because they hate you and verbalise it - that's honesty!

    The red pill rage is a process which takes many many years - so be kind and patient with yourself; you will overcome it!

  12. #32

    Re: Michaela Peterson divorcees and hooks up with a thug

    The first thought that came to my mind was whether Jordan Peterson now considers himself to be a 'pathetic weasel who has not had success with women'.

    Also, I wondered whether he is prepared to go further than his retraction of saying mgtow have a point in warning women, but they're not just warning them and admit that the position of mgtow speak the truth.

    If Jordan Peterson is prepared to educate himself more on the psychology of coercive control and female aggression, he could actually do a lot of public good given his wide audience.

  13. #33
    Senior Member Azure Nomad's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Posts
    3,498
    Reputation
    16587
    Type
    Ghost

    Re: Michaela Peterson divorcees and hooks up with a thug

    Quote Originally Posted by Mr Wombat View Post
    I'd characterise him as mentally unstable. That's the reason people study psychology, you know: to try to manage what's going on inside their own heads. His 12 rules are his own rules for himself and his patients.

    I listened to a few clips, and wanted to interrupt: "Mr Peterson, that doesn't mean anything. What you just said. It doesn't actually mean anything." Psychobabble. Word salad.
    Peterson has a strong intellect but I think what causes him this unstable mentality is because he is so rigid with his thoughts sometimes. Peterson can not let go often of what he was taught and brought up on as a child so it manifests into adulthood.

    Perception often drives reality and when people buy into perception they start to weave a narrative about that reality which isn't true. Peterson with his great intellect has shown even he is vulnerable to such societal mass messaging.


Similar Threads

  1. Jordan Peterson
    By BillyJack in forum Lounge
    Replies: 23
    Last Post: December 26, 2018, 12:05 AM
  2. Replies: 8
    Last Post: April 12, 2018, 9:15 PM
  3. Dr. Jordan Peterson
    By flailer in forum Lounge
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: August 12, 2017, 3:18 AM
  4. Replies: 8
    Last Post: October 13, 2016, 5:44 PM
  5. Nerd Vs Thug
    By Neo in forum Random (Non-MGTOW subjects)
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: November 24, 2014, 1:28 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •