On the Importance of Firebrands

I believe I actually wrote this several weeks ago in Markymark's Thoughts, in response to some of Christopher in Oregon's comments, alongside some comments that he may be scaring away valuable allies from our side. Well, any good strategist can see the benefits of all his members/contributors/allies, and I think that we should at least acknowledge the good. I would've posted this earlier, but certain circumstances prevented it from happening.

--------

I think it's time I commented on Chris.

"The mere presence of heroes can break the chains of destiny" -forgot who said it.

I don't disagree with Chris, I also have my differences in opinion with him, however, if he is who I have observed him to be, he won't care either way.

As you will note, Chris writes and comments a bit more "polarized", some would call it radical, but his accessions appear to come from his own heart/mind, if they WERE based on pure anger, there would be few crannies where his alleged anger's persuasion wouldn't influence. As such, I have seen a couple to a few areas in which he is unparticipated to the extremity of "hatred of women" or any other controlling viewpoint.

However, don't let that fool you, he is a firebrand, some of his words can burn. Some of the more "moderate" in our ranks would see him as overdoing it.

Any movement needs its firebrands though, and I believe Chris to be one of the stronger. One of his qualities is the fact that he hasn't "burned himself out", thus he is not consumed with all-controlling hatred. The reason (I view) that feminists can go on for years hating men is because they have constant repetition from others, and even hypnotic effects from "classrooms" to change who they even are. That and I suppose most Women are predisposed to holding onto every grudge, whereas Men tend to let go easier.

What if Chris isn't in "the movement", you say? We are all in the movement, even those not reading this, never been to MarkyMark's Blog, or even heard of anti-feminism. Your futures intersect into the sphere of the ongoing and upcoming battles ahead, even the MGTOWs and Ghosts who've taken the greatest of care removing themselves from the system. They've done their part, and continue to do A part in this world against feminism whether they see, notice, or want to or not. If you don't have a plan, assuredly you will be in someone else's plan.

Chris' part is fairly natural to him, he educates and influences. The more moderate who would never dream of saying such things subtly get a bit more shifted across our side of the line. It's very subtle because even if they are opposed to such descriptions, they now are more familiar with them, they are no longer alien, and maybe, just maybe, they are a little more acceptable.

Another aspect would be that a lot of people, even on our side, don't like being on the "extreme". Even if your view is currently "moderate", imagine if you lived in an alternate world where most things are the same, but the most extreme our side would get is what qualifies for "moderate" here. They would feel that "maybe I could be wrong, I AM being as far from the opposite side as possible, maybe I should give in MORE", not so much for their opponent, but for themselves, uncompromising behavior broods feelings of self-viewing tyranny in some. They would never feel on the side of Justice. Some who don't like being on the edge, to be the most extreme of a group, no matter what they personally believe, can point the ACTUAL extreme to others and feel relieved. Relieved to themselves that being on the "inside" makes them more benign, more understanding, and yet they keep their position. Our side doesn't backtrack a step.

I have considered the possibility of firebrands scaring away newer recruits, and I have a lot to say on that, perhaps in the future.

I can sing many people's praises, and that would not mean I admire them most, nor should any care for my admiration, I am a mere Amateur and a contest of internet popularity only ends poorly, I will say one more thing of Chris, however.

He is like a Master Monk, a Martial Artist. They have very powerful blows that they pull right out of any stance. Yes, many new Martial Artists who come with strength already can put up nearly that kind of power, but they haven't learned how to without exhausting themselves. The Master understands the need to simultaneously relax and yet be alert, even in the middle of a fight. It is unwise to completely tense up and stay that way until the end, you lose all your energy and you did nothing with it. I see Chris' ability to constantly vigil, and effortlessly respond, yet keep his own distance as a clear indicator of a fortified individual and personality.

I think we all have a part in this, even on the local level, but sometimes; even the little things can spread to affect the global atmosphere.

As I said, I don't agree with Christopher from Oregon on everything, and we even differ on KEY ISSUES, in some spheres, he may even be my opponent. But that is what makes us individuals, our differences, and to roll with the energy from your allies (even if they are only allies in just a few spheres) is a Grand Strategy for Success.

---------

I believe that even if we were all opposed to Chris (and I'm not), he wouldn't go away, nor stop what he's doing. Chris isn't the only one either, we have some real power in some of our more extreme members who are defending our positions and changing minds in ways and places we haven't seen. I'd like to personally thank all who bring our side together, and vanguish our foes. Whether we like it or not, they're there, and they do what they do, if you knew you were on the right side, you wouldn't change your position just because of a fellow member's more aggressive stance, would you?

Last day of August

August has come and gone, and with it some of my more time-restricting activities, I'll have more time to write now, but most of it will be spent reading, absorbing, and planning.

So much has happened I didn't get to comment on, nor does it feel all the proper to when so much has been explored already. It'd be "beating a dead horse".

So be on the lookout for my September posts on new things, and the most basic things we can't ignore!

-Amateur Strategist.

Feminism Vs. Men's Rights

It was my pleasure to catch this at Counter-Feminist a few days ago (I think), Anyway, it just goes to show how experienced our veteran thinkers are. The Logic is so simple, yet indesputable, I hope to come up with thesis(es) half as good as this in the future.

I believe it's important for all of us to realize first and foremost our purpose, and our reason for being. Afterall, to use an analogy, the best way to bring down a tree is not to cut the branches from the top down, but to strike it's core, it's trunk. I think our core-reasoning is that trunk, and the more we realize how necessary our actions are, the more powerful and strengthened the rest of our efforts will become.

Whether MRA, FRA, or MGTOW, or even PUA we can all see that our rights are important to us, and we'll need to act, to argue, to vote, to FIGHT to keep our rights.

EDIT: This video is originally made by Factory, of "Hunting for Archtypes" fame, which was then watched (repeatedly) by Counter-Feminist and then transposed into text on Counter-Feminist's Blog. I'm just spreading the word, as the basics are always the most important.

Learn something everyday

Hello, friends, today I was reading Markymark's comments (that is, comments from others in MM's posts), when a post by Novaseeker struck me.

Novaseeker said...
Groups like the Amish and the Hasidim work precisely because they are small, isolated groups who do not seek to change the broader culture (because they can't), but rather simply isolate themselves from it to the greatest degree possible.

I'm not saying that doesn't work for the people who are in those groups, but it needs to be remembered that (1) these groups have very old traditions (which is much of what gives them their power within their groups), and are not trying to break new ground in the current setting and (2) while this may work for a limited number of men/women, it will not change the culture as a whole at all.

So, to be honest, while that may be a solution for some men and women, it is simply that -- a personal solution. It is, in effect, a way of devising a coping mechanism for avoiding the current system, rather than trying to find a way to fix the system -- precisely because it seeks to live in isolation from the system. In that respect, it is like any of the other strategies that men are adopting to adapt to the current system, which these guys all basically dislike for varying reasons: (1) PUAs who work the system for personal gain, (2) ghosts who avoid the system and go their own way, (3) MGTOWs who may have relations with women but try to do so in a way that is independent of the system and (4) your own proposed isolated community idea, which also seeks to live outside of the system.

All of these are legitimate responses, but none of them is an adequate criticism of MRA/FRA. MRA/FRA is actually trying to engage and change the system, whereas the rest of these are coping strategies for dealing with a system which is admittedly bad for men (and women).
07 July, 2009 10:35

It reminds me precisely about one's main goal; is it to actually CHANGE the way things are? Or do you believe such doing is folly and suicidal, and you want to avoid the fallout? More comment on my personal view on this later.

Brilliant post by Black Sea

As a quick intro, I was reading at Whiskey place (https://www.blogger.com/comment.g?blogID=3893665144141962944&postID=4615454965905533997) and a dispute began about JUST HOW MANY Sex partners does the average young Woman have these days? Well, Black Sea breaks it down and gives some good points: (Mostly I want to reference this later, and hate losing posts to obscurity)

Black Sea said...
I'm not nearly as statistically inclined as many of the commenters here, so my observations will have to be more hypothetical or anecdotally driven, but this topic does interest me.

From what I can gather, for middle class, suburban reared, university educated women with some career orientation and -- more importantly -- the income to support a single's lifestyle, "normal" expectations would involve becoming sexually active in high school, having an active sexual/romantic life through most of ones 20s, then getting serious about settling down around the age of 28. Bear in mind, that doesn't mean getting married at 28, but rather, making the psychological transition toward getting married, so that one might actual snag a suitable fiance before the dreaded three-oh. And this is for the more realistic ones, who realize that their market value will diminish rapidly in their 30s.

Let's assume that such a woman first has sex at age 15, that she remains monogamous in every long-term relationship that she considers serious, and that in her own mind, she's leading the normal life of an educated young woman in your typical metropolitan area.

Let's further imagine that she is not particularly promiscuous, and between the ages of 15 and 28 she has four "serious", long-term relationships, which average a duration of 1.5 years each. Thus, within those serious relationship phases, she has four sex partners, over a total of six years. The end of each of these relationships constitutes something of a psychological trauma for her, since she was seriously bonded to each of these boys or men, even if she is ultimately the one who initiated the break up.

Let's then consider her seven "off-years" during which she may be dating guys for a couple of months here, a couple of weeks there, and a few one night stands in between. At other times, and for considerable periods, she is more or less celibate. Let's say that during the off years, she averages only three sex partners per year. Hardly "sluttish" by today's standards. Indeed, almost virginal as compared to "Sex and the City."

Neverthless, such a woman will, by the age of 28, have accumulated a total of 25 sex partners, and will have undergone at least four difficult, emotionally traumatic break-ups (she may have become pretty attached to several of the two or three month boyfriends as well). Furthermore, there could well be a pregnancy (aborted) and an STD thrown into the mix.

So now she's 28. After all of this, she's going to form a durable, powerful bond with a normal man, not an actor or professional athlete, or multi-millionaire, or whatever? And that bond is going to sustain her and her spouse through 40 to 50 years of marriage?

Almost all of her experience, from childhood really, has taught her that relationships are fragile and temporary, that men, or at least exciting, attractive men, are not to be trusted, and that when lovers quarrel, or grow bored, or meet someone newer and more interesting, the relationship ends. This has been her life since she was a teenager.

We rarely consider the extent to which the "rules of the game" are laid down for us between the ages of 12 and 25, when we really come into self-awareness, and ultimately, into adulthood. One of the first things I observed when I began dating in high school was that girls from divorced homes were somehow different, both quicker to go to bed and, ultimately, angrier toward men.

Such a woman as I've imagined above (even if not a child of divorce) is going to have to overcome and awful lot of engrained expectations to make a durable marriage with anyone, and the resultant divorces and prolonged, or lifelong, unmarried status of many can hardly be surprising.

Eventually, even romantics grow wary of hot stoves.
June 28, 2009 10:40 AM

Truly good stuff, if I may comment, it seems to put things in perspective for even the "best case scenario" when it comes to most American Women (really, it might as well be "all" with those odds). With the spread of STDs and the whole psychological support (or in this case enfeeblement) for long term relationships, well... How is this going to work?

Personal Improvement Log #1

This blog will also be about some personal improvement, which is mostly in the mental aspect.

This isn't to be taken as "gospel" for a healthy growth in ability, but charting what I (an Amateur in this field as well) have found to work for me, and possibly others I know who've tried it.

Our first schema: Short-term memory.

I had thought I'd start my logs with my worst vice, procrastination, but that is a LONG road to walk. One step at a time now.

I've had problems remembering things in the short-term; people's names, important numbers (parking, serial, anything I don't get to choose for a password or location), a lot of things, unless I really made an effort to repeat it at least 3 times aloud. It rarely happens to me anymore, and here is why I think that is.

I believe your mind/brain (from here on mind) is like your muscles: Parts of it are meant for certain tasks, and though you may for instance, exercise your legs/feet, it won't help your arms or trunk. Well, I think the Mind is just like that, parts are for planning, memory, logic, art, math, writing, you name it. You may be familiar with right brain/left brain writings, but I think this isn't part of that, necessarily.

A couple of years ago, I borrowed my friend's Nintendo DS, because he wanted me to try this brain training game. I got bored with all the easy math and right brain/left brain stuff in it, but then hit a game similar to this:

http://flashfabrica.com/f_learning/brain/brain.html

Same sound effects, actually, I wouldn't be surprised if this were a computer trial of the game itself, but since it's in Japanese, I'll never know.

The rules are you see the numbers, and then click them in the order low to high (the game on Brain Age 1 on Nintendo DS is called "Low to High" by the way).

With each successful sweep, it'll add another number. Remember, it's not just where the 1, 2, 3 and 4 are, it could have 1, 9, 6, 4 and 3 on there and you'd have to click the right order: 1, 3, 4, 6, 9.

At first, I played it and could only get 3 numbers (on the DS, I saw this in an e-mail, and it reminded me of how much it helped), but I became slightly possessed about it, I hated losing, yes, but I could feel that something was... shall I say... waking up in my skull. I never considered myself stupid (or smart for that matter), but it's entirely possible I let an important part of my Mind slip into atrophy like this, only to be reawoken by this after several years of bad short term memory.

I started to remember people's names, and after I had trained on this every day for 3 months (I missed a couple days, but eh), I could remember people's phone numbers WITHOUT pen/paper, and without reciting it into a song/poem and reciting it 3+ times... I'd say that's progress, but I remember (haha) that I started to retain things much better.

The way I THINK it works is that this game makes you more perceptive when you decide to be. Remember, you only get 2 seconds to look at all the numbers, that's how long it takes to say someone's name. I think whatever part of your mind "opens up" to new information is exercised in this part, and the retaining part is in how well you can remember the sequence.

This was two years ago and my memory's been better since... so if you think it can help you (remember, it's not 2 straight hours of this right now and then never again, it's maybe a few minutes everyday), you may as well give the link I put up a try, it's in Japanese, but I liked hitting each bubble on the Nintendo DS better.

I'm not advocating going out and buying a video game system just for this, which is why I decided to spend a few minutes finding the "free" version, which I think gets the job done just the same. I make no guarantees, but it sure helped me, I have many of these logs to write, so this isn't a one-time thing, I hope.

One last note, the number that appears after you're "done" (when you've done 9 waves or so, I think) with each session is how old your brain is, the closer to 20 the better apparently. Just letting you know in case you think your score is getting worse with time. Also, don't let the score get you down, if anything it can show maybe that you're tired, but keep at it and you will improve!
Let me know what you think!

On Shaming Language:

Hiya! It is time to discuss one of our enemy's most used and more powerful (but not most powerful) weapons, Shaming Language.

Shaming Language is any kind of insult meant to shut you up, first and foremost. It isn't to add to the discussion, it's not to explore new angles of the problem, it is to cause you shame and to cause you to give up.

Shaming Language is a very poor way to choose to "win" an argument, but it has been shown to be effective to those not expecting it, especially if they don't have a few minutes to ponder what's really going on. Remember, it doesn't add anything to the discussion, it's an assault on your character that if not prepared for, you could end up believing.

Shaming Language is really more like several types of such interjections, and it comes in all forms, both slightly flattering to you, and very very hostile, new forms are probably trying to be made everyday, but ever since it's first usage, we've been on the upperhand, countering it at every move. Our motives are just, and our movement is good, never forget what you're fighting for.

I've read many influential posts, but this is one of the most powerful I've ever read about actually taking them down, or at least one of their advantages. The link is from dumpyourwifenow.com, but it could've been from somewhere else first, I don't know, however, if the writer is who I think he is, it's meant for all to see regardless.

http://www.dumpyourwifenow.com/2007/03/01/the-anti-male-shaming-tactics-catalog/

It's a long read, and I considered just pasting it here, but I figure things will be more manageable this way. If it disappears one day, I have a back up to make sure it survives.

Now that you've read (most or more) of it, it is time to comment:

I like how it's very specific about the direction of both incoming attack, and why it doesn't matter, how it isn't true, and the perfectly logical response to such language. It lists every tactic I've seen used in such a way, though I'd like to see them developing something against the "kindness" technique they are using; the one where (basically) they "agree" with your position, and say that we should "work together".

Make no mistake, these people are not on your side, my side, or anyone who supports the rights of Men, it's merely a way to try to get you to support their side while they give yours lip service, of course after they "allegiantly" debunk most of your serious issues and claim to support the smaller ones.

Remember, Shaming Language is something said to put YOU on the defensive, giving them the initiative. I remember reading a post that put that very eloquently, I shall try to find it for next time.

I know I can put that into better words eventually, with examples, but for now the post is going up.